Ommanney. A Critical Dissertation On The Athanasian Creed (Microform) : Its Original Language, Date, Authorship, Titles, Text, Reception and Use. 1897.

CRITICAL DISSERTATION
ON
THE ATHANASIAN CREED

OMMANNEY
Bonbon
HENRY FROWDE
OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS WAREHOUSE
AMEN CORNER, E.G.
THE MACMILLAN CO., 66 FIFTH AVENUE

A CRITICAL DISSERTATION
ON THE
ATHANASIAN CREED
ITS ORIGINAL LANGUAGE, DATE, AUTHORSHIP,
TITLES, TEXT, RECEPTION, AND USE
BY
G. D. W. OMMANNEY, M.A.
PREBENDARY OF WELLS
.-! nthor of The

'
A thanasian Creed, an examination of recent theories respecting:
its Date and Origin,' and of ' Early History of the A thanasian Creed,
1
the resiilts of some original research upon the subject'
AT THE CLARENDON PRESS

1897
PRINTED AT THE CLARENDON PRESS
BY HORACE HART
PRINTER TO THE UNIVKRSITY
1496263
PREFACE
MANY years ago the late Dean Burgon suggested

to me, as a work which I might usefully undertake,
to supply the desideratum of a complete account
up to date of the Athanasian Creed. The following

pages are the result of a very humble but I trust
honest attempt, so far as it

goes, to reach the high
ideal thus set before me. Of its imperfections I am
fully sensible.
almost needless to say that I have derived
It is
great assistance from the well-known work of Water-

land upon the subject, which, though it necessarily
falls short of our present standard of knowledge,
possesses a permanent value. But I have not

accepted his statements and conclusions without
examination, and in some cases have been unable
to follow him ; as, for instance, in regard to the
Commentary ascribed by him to Venantius Fortu-

natus, but which seems to me to be of uncertain
authorship.
vi Preface.
Another book which has furnished me with in-
formation is the late Dr. .Swainson's work on the

Creeds, and I am all the more ready to make
the acknowledgement, as I differ entirely from the
author's theories with respect to the origin, con-
struction, and date of the Quicunque vult. This

was my introduction to the important MSS. of the
Bibliotheque Nationale at Paris Latin 13,159,
1,451, and 3,8486.

The information acquired has been sup-
thus
plemented by the results of study and research

carried on, as opportunity has permitted, for more
than twenty years in our own public Libraries and
in some foreign collections, viz. the Bibliotheque
Nationale at Paris, the Public Library at Troyes,
the Ambrosian Library at Milan, and the Vatican.
It will be seen that I have divided the work into
two parts, the first treating in detail of the various

authorities and documents on which the history of
the Creed rests, the second stating the conclusions
to be drawn from them in regard to the several
points of principal interest and importance. Any
person, not largely endowed with the gift of patience,
may do wisely to proceed at once to the second

part, and if he wishes to examine the grounds of
any particular conclusion as explained in the first,
he will be able to do so by means of reference to
the list of contents and the foot-notes.
Preface. vii
The present volume comprises, together with

much additional matter, the substance of two
volumes previously issued by me on the same
subject.
My sincere thanks are due to the Rev. C. E.

Plumb, Principal of St. Stephen's House, Oxford,
for kindly undertaking the troublesome but useful
task of compiling Indices. To others, who have
assisted me by advice or information, I have
expressed my grateful acknowledgements in the
various passages of my book where they are called
for.
G. D. W. OMMANNEY.
OXFORD,
November, 1896.
CONTENTS
PART I.
DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE.
INTRODUCTORY ......... PAGE
i
TESTIMONIES
i.
...... ... CHAPTER
Avitus, Bishop of Vienne.

I.
2. Sermon on the Apostles' Creed

2-46
3. Another
'
addressed to Catechumens at the Traditio Symboli.'
Sermon of the same class, attributed to Caesarius, Bishop of Aries.
4. A
fragment of a third, sometimes inaccurately described as the
Colbcrtine manuscript of the Athanasian Creed, in this volume
'
generally referred to as the
, Treves fragment.' 5. Confession of
P"aith of the Fourth Council of Toledo. 6. Confession of Faith
of Denebert, Bishop of the Wiccii or Worcester. 7. Alcuin,
Libellus de Processione Spirit us Saudi. 8. Theodulf, Bishop of
Orleans, De Sfiritu Sancto. 9. Letter of Frank monks of Mount

Olivet at Jerusalem. 10. Agobard, Bishop of Lyons, n. Cata-
logue of Abbots of Fleury on the Loire. 12. Letter of Florus the
Deacon to Hyldrad the Abbot. 13. Hincmar, Archbishop of
Rheims. 14. Anscharius, Archbishop of Hamburg and Bremen.
15. Ratramn or Bertram, Contra Graecorum ofposita. 16. /Eneas,
Bishop of Paris, Liber adversus Graecos. 17. Confession of Faith
of Adalbert, Bishop of Morinum. 18. Ancient Charter, quoted by
Martene. 19. Udalric, Consuetudines Cluniacenses. 20. Ratherius,
Bishop of Verona. 21. Abbo Floriacensis, Apologeticus. 22.Êlfric,
Homily De Fide Catholic a. 23. Irish document edited by the
late Bishop Reeves. 24. Honorius of Autun, Gemma animae.
25. Abelard, Epislolac \. and x. 26. Otto, Bishop of Freisingen,
Chronicle. 27. Henry, Abbot of Brunswick, quoted in the Chronicle
of Arnold, Abbot of Liibeck. 28. Treatise ascribed to Robert
Paululus of Amiens. 29. John Beleth, Rationale. 30. Letter of
the Legates of Pope Gregory IX
respecting their mission to the
Eastern Church. 31. Alexander Hales, Sum ma Theologiac.
32. Thomas Aquinas, Summa 7'heologiae 33. Johannes Janu-
ensis, sometimes called Balbus, Catholicon. 34. Gulielmus Du-
randus or Durantus, Rationale. De vita
35. Luclolphus Saxo,
Christi.
x Contents.
CHAPTER II.
PAGE
CANONS AND ECCLESIASTICAL INJUNCTIONS , . .
47-92
Epistola Canonica.
i. 2. Canon of Autun. 3. Theodulf, Capi-
tulare, also Capilula ad Presbyteros. 4. Other evidence of the use
of the Athanasian Creed being enjoined by authority in the time of
Charlemagne. 5. Hatto or Hetto or Ahyto, Bishop of Basle,
Cap^t^^lare. 6. Capitiilare drawn up during the reign of the
Emperor Lothair. 7. Hincmar, Archbishop of Rheims, Capititla

Synodica. 8. Riculfus, Bishop of Soissons, Capitula. g. Regino,
Abbot of Prum, Libri duo de Ecclesiasticis disciplinis. 10. Ad-
monitio synodalis. n. Atto, Bishop of Vercellae, Capitiilare.
12. Ratherius, Bishop of Verona, Synodica, 13. Walter de Canti-
lupe, Bishop of Worcester, Constitutiones. 14. Walter de Kirkham,
Bishop of Durham, Constitutiones. 15. Peter Quivil, Bishop of
Exeter, Constitiitiones. 16. Confession of Faith in the Sarum
Ordo ad msitandum injirnmm.
CHAPTER III.
MANUSCRIPT COPIES . . . . . .
-93-165
Milan Ambrosian Library, O. 212, of the eighth century
i.
a brief collection of Confessions of Faith and works upon dogma.
2. MS. of the same century, mentioned by Montfaucon as belonging
to the Abbey of St. Germain-des-Pres in Paris, but now lost.
3. Another, probably belonging to the same century, mentioned by
Mabillon, also lost. 4. Codex numbered xxviii in Denis' Catalogue
of Theological Manuscripts in the Imperial Library at Vienna
a Psalter written in the latter part of the eighth century. 5. Paris,
Bibliotheque Nationale, Latin MS. 13,159 a Psalter dating between
Christmas 795 and Christmas 800. 6. Another MS. in the same
Library, Latin 4,85^. In this book, owing to its mutilation, the
Athanasian Creed is imperfect. It is of the same epoch as the
Vienna Psalter mentioned above. 7. In the same Library, Latin
MS. 1,451, of the beginning of the ninth century a collection of
Canons. 8. In the same Library, Latin MS. 3,848 B, also of the
early part of the ninth century. It includes inter alia the Herovall
collection of Canons. 9. Psalter written in honour of the Emperor
Lothair probably about 834. lo. The Utrecht Psalter, probably
written early in the ninth century, u. British Museum, Cotton
MS. Galba A. xviii, sometimes described as King ./Ethelstan's
Psalter. In this book the Psalms and Canticles, including the
Athanasian Creed, were written in Germany between 817 and 850.
12. Rome, Vatican Library, Palat. MS. 574, of the ninth century
a collection of Canons. 13. No. 269 in Denis' Catalogue of
Theological MSS. in the Vienna Imperial Library. In this book
the Athanasian Creed follows the two books of Isidore of Seville
addressed to Florentina, and it is followed by the original Nicene
Creed and another Confession of Faith. 14. The Psalter of Charles
the Bald, written between 842 and 869. It is deposited in the
Bibliotheque Nationale at Paris. 15. Parker MS. 272. O. 5,

Corpus Christi College, Cambridge a Psalter dating probably 883.
16. A quadruple Psalter deposited at Bamberg, dating 909.
17. British Museum MS. Bib. Reg. 2. B. v Psalter written in
Contents. xi
PAGE
18. Lambeth MS. 427 Psalter
England early in the tenth century.
written in England about the middle of the tenth century. 19. Salis-
bury Cathedral Library MS. 150 Psalter written in England in

the second half of the tenth century. 20. Paris, Bibliotheque
Nationale, Latin MSS. 2,341 and 2,076,

both assigned to the tenth
century. The Athanasian Creed occurs in a series of Confessions
of Faith, preserved in these two codices. 21. Rome, Vatican
Library, Vat. MS. 82 Psalter probably compiled in the Province

of Liguria and in the tenth century. 22. In the same Library,
Vat. Psalter assigned to the tenth century, and probably com-
84
piled in Central Italy. 23. Cambridge University Library, Ff.
T. 23, written shortly before the Norman Conquest in England,
24. Parker MS. 391, Corpus
Christi
probably at Canterbury.
College, Cambridge Psalter written about the time of the
Norman Conquest in England, probably at Worcester. 25. British
Museum, Arundel MS. 60 Psalter written at Winchester at the
end of the eleventh century.26. Oxford Bodleian Library, Canonici
MS. Psalter of the tenth century written in Italy.
Patr. Lat. 88
27. Paris, Cod. Mazarin, 364 Breviary written at Monte Casino
in 1099.
CHAPTER
COMMENTARIES OR EXPOSITIONS ..... IV.
Commentary sometimes attributed to Venantius Fortunatus.

i.
166-269
2. The Troyes Commentary. 3. The Oratorian. 4. The Bouhier.

5. The Paris. 6. The Stavelot. 7. Commentary from an Orleans
MS. attributed, but on uncertain grounds, to Theodulf. 8. Com-
mentary drawn partly from the Stavelot and partly from the
Oratorian. Commentary in the form of question and answer.
9.
10. Commentary in Boulogne MS 20. n. Commentary in Bruno's
Psalter. 12. Two expositions in Milan MS. M. 79. 13. Inter-
rogative Commentary in British Museum MS. Reg. 8. B. xiv.
14. Commentary in Milan MS. I. 152. 15. Abelard's Commentary.
1 Discourse of Hildegardis, Abbess of St. Rupert near Bingcn.
6.
17. in Phillipps MS.

Commentary 18. Commentary in
1655.
Merton College, Oxford, MS. 208. 19! Commentary of Simon
Tornacensis. 20. Of Alexander Necham. 21.. Of Alexander
Nequam. 22. Of Alexander Hales. 23. Of Richard Rolle of
Hampole. 24. Of John Wyclif or one of his followers. 25. Of
Dionysius Carthusiensis. 26.. Of Petrus deOsma. 27.. Of Jacobus
Perez.
CHAPTER V.
VERSIONS
270-332
Greek versions (a) The first of four Greek versions edited
i. :
by Montfaucon in his Diatribe tie Symbolo Quicunqiie (If) the

;
second (c) the third (d) the fourth (c) the first of two Greek
; ; ;
versions edited by Professor

Caspari ; (/) the
second; (^) the
version in the Appendix to the Greek 2. English ver-
Horology.
sions, including that in the Book. German.
Prayer 3. 4. French.
5. Spanish.
Xll Contents.
PART II.
CONCLUSIONS.
CHAPTER I. PAGE
THE LANGUAGE .
334-335
CHAPTER II.
THE DATE 336-374

CHAPTER III.
AUTHORSHIP 375-391
CHAPTER IV.
TITLES .
392-406
CHAPTER V.
THE TEXT 407-419

CHAPTER VI.
RECEPTION AND USE .

420-459
APPENDIX.
A. TREVES FRAGMENT
B.
......
EXTRACT FROM Admonitio synodalis . . .
461-462
462-463
C.
infinmim
D. LATIN PSALTERS
........
CONFESSION OF FAITH IN SARUM Ordo ad visitandum
463-464
465-472
E. THE TEXT OF THE ATHANASIAN CREED, AS IT
APPEARS IN WATERLAND'S Critical History, WITH
VARIOUS READINGS FROM SEVENTEEN MANUSCRIPTS 472-478
F. THE TROYES COMMENTARY FROM THE TROYES MS.
804 478-491
G. THE ORATORIAN COMMENTARY FROM THE SAME MS.,
WITH COLLATIONS FROM MAI'S EDITION . .
492-514
H. PREFACE TO THE ORATORIAN COMMENTARY AS EDITED
BY CARDINAL MAI, WITH COLLATIONS FROM THE
VATICAN MS. REG. 231 . . . . .
514-515
Contents. xiii
I. THE BOUHIER COMMENTARY FROM TROYES MS. 1,979,

WITH COLLATIONS FROM TROYES 1,532 AND BRITISH
MUSEUM ADDIT. 24,902 5 l
5~53 l
J.
THEPARIS COMMENTARY FROM PARIS BIBLIOTH^QUE
NATIONALE, LATIN MS. 1,012
K. GREEK VERSION OF THE ATHANASIAN CREED FROM
.... 531-539
rrjs aetirapOevov Maptas KCIT' edos rrjs
aV\.TJS, PRINTED BY ALDUS AT VENICE

A.D. 1497 . . . . . . .
540-541
L. PORTION OF A
VAT. MS. 81 .......
GREEK VERSION OF THE SAME FROM
541
M. EARLY ENGLISH VERSION OF THE SAME FROM BRITISH
MUSEUM MS. ADDIT. 17,376
N. WYCLIFFITE VERSION OF THE SAME FROM BRITISH
.... 542-544
MUSEUM MS. ADDIT. 10,046 .

544-546
GENERAL INDEX ........

INDEX OF MANUSCRIPTS
547
. . . . . ,
554
ERRATA.
P. 183, 1. i$,for E. A. react A. E. Burn.
P. 189, 1. 1 8, for controversy read heresy.
P. 212, 1.
14. for is read in.
P. 486, 1.
^^,.for montem read mortem.
PART I.
DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE.
INTRODUCTORY.
THE evidences of the ancient history of the Athanasian
Creed must be sought firstly in passages of ancient authors
or documents containing express references to it or quoting
or adopting its language also in Canons and authoritative
:
injunctions relating to it also in manuscript copies of it

:
now existing, or which are known to have existed, though

now lost: also in Commentaries or expositions upon its
text :
lastly, in the different versions or translations into
which it has been rendered.
I propose first to review these several classes of evidence
and then to consider the conclusions to be
categorically,
drawn from them with respect to the language in which
the Creed was composed, its date and
authorship, the titles
applied to it, its text, its use and reception in the Church.
In regard to the three first of these
points it will be
necessary also to take into consideration the internal
evidence supplied by the document itself.
CHAPTER I.
TESTIMONIES.
PASSAGES of ancient authors or documents containing
express references to the Creed or quoting or adopting its
language. These I will classify as ancient testimonies.

i. The who
can with good reason be
earliest writer
alleged as a witness to the existence of the Quicunque

and its reception in the Church as a work of authority is
Avitus, who became Bishop of Vienne in Gaul, A.D. 490,
and is believed to have died A.D. 518. In a fragment of
a work De Divinitate Spiritus Sancti, written contra
Gundobadnm Arrianum regem, he quotes, and that as
from a well-known work of authority, the very language
of the Athanasian Creed respecting the Holy Spirit :
'quern nee factum legimus nee genitum nee creatum,'

adding shortly afterwards Nos vero Spiritum Sanctum
:
'
dicimus a Filio et Patre procedere.' What makes the

matter still more clear, if that is possible, is that in
another fragment of the same book he refers, as it appears,

to some formulated confession of the Catholic Faith as
teaching this doctrine of the Double Procession

'
Sicut :
est proprium Spiritui Sancto a Patre Filioque procedere,
istud Catholica Fides etiamsi renuentibus non persuaserit,

in suae tamen disciplinae regula non excedit.' If a Con-
fession of Faith is here alluded to, what else but the
Quicimqiie could be intended, the Filioque not having been

inserted, at least so far as we are aware, in the Constantino-
Testimonies. 3
as the commencement of the sixth

politan Creed so early
century? We
shall find too, as we proceed, that the
'
Athanasian Creed was entitled sometimes Catholica Fides/

1
and that was probably its earliest title
this .
2. Evidence of the early existence of the Athanasian
Creed is supplied by Sermons on the Apostles' Creed

'
'
addressed to Catechumens at the Traditio

Symboli
previous to Baptism. The first of these which I shall
adduce, as being probably the earliest, is preserved in
two MSS. of the Bibliotheque Nationale, Paris; Latin
2
It commences: Rogo vos et ad-
'
3848 B. and 2123 .
moneo, fratres karissimi, quicunque vult salvus esse fidem

rectam catholicam firmiter teneat inviolatamque conservet :
quam si quis digne non habuerit, regnum Dei non possi-

debit.' The resemblance here to the two first verses of the
Creed is such, as to produce the conviction either that the
Creed borrowed from the Sermon or the Sermon from the
Creed. The latter is clearly the most probable alternative.
In two other places the language of the Quicunque crops
up in the comment upon the Articles, conceived by the

'
Holy Ghost, born of the Virgin Mary Hoc est sine matre
:
'
'
de Patre Deus ante secula, et homo de matre sine patre

carnali in finem seculorum,' and in the
exposition of the
doctrine of the Trinity :
'
Pater Deus est et Filius Deus est
et Spiritus Sanctus Deus est et non sunt tres Dii sed unus ;
est Deus.' This discourse be considered to be coeval

may
with Avitus, the Creed which it
expounds being of a type
which cannot be assigned to a later date
apparently, as it
1
See Bnluzii Miscellamorum liber
primus. Paris, 1678. Baluze published
these fragments, as
appears from the list of contents, from an ancient MS. of
the Abbey of St. Gall in Switzerland.
-
The expository portion of it is printed in Appendix G of my volume
entitled Early History of the Athanasian Creed. It was also edited by
Caspari, Kirchenhistorische Anecdola,
p. 283.
E 2
4 Documentary Evidence. [CH.
' ' '

e
passus or mortuus or omni-

{
did not contain the words
' c
potentis,' nor yet the articles descendit ad inferna/ sanc-

torum communionem/ c vitam aeternam.' In all probability
it was preached in Gaul, but the author is unknown.
3. The second of these Sermons which I shall refer to as
adopting the terminology of the Quicunque was at first

published among the works of St. Augustine, but was
relegated by the Benedictines to the Appendix of their
and assigned to Caesarius, who was Bishop of
edition,
Aries from A.D. 502 until his death in 542 A.D. 1 The
commencement corresponds almost word for word with
that of the previously-mentioned Sermon Rogo et ad- :
'
moneo vos, fratres carissimi, ut quicunque vult salvus esse,

fidem rectam ac catholicam discat, firmiter teneat, inviola-
tamque conservet.' The word discat introduced here is

' '
noticeable, as possibly suggested by the requirement to

learn the Athanasian Creed by heart, which was imposed
upon the clergy, as we shall see by-and-by, in places as
early as the seventh and sixth centuries. The preacher

then continues his address in terms apparently borrowed
both from the first part of the Quicunque relating to the
Trinity, and from the second relating to the Incarnation :
'
Ita ergo oportet unicuique observare, ut credat Patrem,
credat Filium, credat Spiritum Sanctum. Deus Pater,
Deus Filius, Deus et Spiritus Sanctus sed tamen non tres
;
Dii, sed unus Deus. Qualis Pater, talis Filius, talis et
Spiritus Sanctus. Attamen credat unusquisque fidelis,
quod Filius aequalis est secundum divinitatem

Patri et
minor est Patri secundum humanitatem carnis.'

4. The third Sermon of this class which I must appeal
to as a witness to the antiquity of the Athanasian Creed
1
S. Augustini Opera, Appendix tomi quinti, Sermo ccxliv :
Migne, Patrol.
Latina, torn, xxxix. 2194.
Testimonies. 5
i.]
exists at present only in a fragmentary state.

The frag-
ment contained in No.. 3836 of the
is
Latin MSS. of the
Paris National Library a manuscript assigned by Palaeo-

a single dissentient voice, to the eighth
graphers, without
century, written in Lombardic characters and comprising
an ancient collection of Canons. Montfaucon, in his Dia-
tribe de Symbolo Quicunque, says that experts of his time
dated this MS. about the age of Pepin, i. e. the. middle of
the eighth century and such was his own opinion.
;
The
authors of the Nouveait Traitf Diplomatique affirm that
'the Latinity and faulty spelling prove clearly enough
that it was written before the revival of letters in the time
of Charlemagne V A facsimile of the writing, which in-
cludes the fragment we are referring to, appears in the
third volume of the publications of the Palaeographical
Society ;
and the editors describe the MS. as belonging
to the eighth century. This fragment is introduced after
a reference to the Council of Chalcedon with the following
note Haec invini Treveris in uno libro scriptum sic
:
'
incipiente Domini nostri Ihesu Christi et reliqua.' In it
the author of the Sermon adapts and modifies several

verses of the Athanasian Creed, for the purpose of in-
structing his hearers in the doctrine of the Incarnation.

It begins abruptly with the words of the twenty-ninth
verse Domini nostri Ihesu Christi fideliter credat
:
'
and ;
'
all the verses following down to the thirty-ninth inclusive

are thus dealt with. The text of the Creed is not followed
literallyand exactly. No verse is reproduced without some
variation, and in some places the divergence is very great.
The thirty-fifth verse is almost passed over. Still the re-
semblance between the two documents is sufficiently
obvious to show beyond a possibility of doubt the close
1
Tom. iii.
p. 73.
relationship between them. One must have been framed

from the other ;
the Creed from the fragment or the
reverse. The late Dr. Swainson and Dr. Lumby, following
former to be the case, that the
in his steps, believed the
fragment was the embryo out of which the latter part of

the Quicunque grew and very naturally they did so, con- ;
sidering the exigencies of their hypothesis respecting the

Creed, that a work of the ninth century, not earlier.
it is
Notwithstanding these high authorities, I venture to main-

tain on the other hand, and with the fullest confidence,
that the Treves fragment was built upon the Creed as its
basis ;
and I believe this to be the conclusion to which
nine out of ten persons qualified to form an opinion on the
subject would be led careful comparison of the two by a

documents. As a point of great importance, I
this is
think it expedient to reproduce here as briefly as possible

some particulars of the proof which on a previous occasion
I
produced upon the subject.
Let the verses 34 and 35 of the Creed be contrasted
with the corresponding passages from St. Augustine and
the fragment.
Ut quemaclmodum homo
'
Unus omnino non '
Unus Christus est '
est anima et caro, sic esset confusione substantiae, non confusione substan-
Christus Deus et homo, sed imitate personae. tiae, sed unitatem per-
Idem Deus qui homo et qni Nam sicut anima ratio- sonae qui passus,' . . ,
Deus idem homo non con- nalis et caro unus est etc. (Treves fragment
: :
fusione naturae sed imitate homo, ita Deus et homo see Appendix A.)
(S. Augustini uniis est Christus. Qui

personae.'
Sermo clxxxvi. cap. I.) passus est,' etc. (Atha-
'
Sicut enim unus est nasian Creed, verses 34,
homo anima rationalis et 35, 36.)
caro, sic nnus est Christus
Deus et homo.' (Id. Tract.
in Johannis Evan., Ixxviii.
'
The reading
'
unitatem may be passed by as of no
significance. Probably it was owing to the ignorance or

Testimonies. 7
i.]
and was not originally in the

carelessness of the scribe,
Sermon. On comparison of the above passages it must be
evident that the verses of the Creed could not be drawn
from the fragment, because they contain important matter
which is not to be found there, also that they were drawn
from the passages of St. Augustine. In verse 34, unus
'
omnino is an abbreviated rendering of idem Deus qui

' '
'
homo et qui Deus idem homo in the firstpassage of

'
St. Augustine, and

'
substantiae in the former is sub-
stituted for 'naturae' in the latter. Verse 35 is nothing
but the second passage of St. Augustine with a similar
transposition of words in each member of the sentence. It
is still further clear that the fragment, or to speak more

accurately, the author of the Sermon, of which it
originally
formed a part, drew immediately from the Creed, not
'
'
from Augustine, because he adopts the
St. substantiae of
'
the former, not the naturae 'of the latter and, wishing to ;
avoid using the illustration of Christ's unity which appears

in verse 35, he still borrows from it
'
Christus est,' and sub-
'
stitutes this for the
'
omnino of the Creed in order to
make clear the reference of
qui passus/ Obviously
'
. . .
the verses of the Creed supplied the materials with which

this passage of the
fragment was constructed. This is quite
sufficient proof of the point I contend for ;
but I will add
two others in confirmation. In the thirty-sixth verse the
Athanasian Creed has '
ad inferos,' for which the fragment
'
substitutes '
ad inferna a change which the homilist would
naturally make in discoursing at the
'
Traditio Symbol!/
for the Catechumens whom he was
addressing would have
just before been taught to repeat the latter words in the
Apostles' Creed. On the other hand, if the Qnicunqne

was drawn from the fragment, as Professors Swainson and
Lumby have asserted, why did not the former retain the
' '
f
ad inferna of the latter ? The use of ad inferos in Con-
'
fessions of Faith is so very rare, comparatively speaking,

that the substitution of it for the more common and
familiar expression would be perfectly unaccountable.
'
'
Once more the Creed reads resurgere habent in the
thirty-eighth verse a peculiar idiom, but one of common
occurrence in the writings of St. Augustine. In its place
the fragment gives erunt resurrecturi,' which savours of
'
the corrupt Latinity of the sixth or seventh centuries.

Had the author of the Creed drawn from the fragment, he
'
would probably have substituted for this barbarism resur-
recturi sunt,' but it is most improbable that he would have
'
put in its place such a peculiar expression as resurgere

habent.'
This Treves fragment is a document of such import-
ance in the history of the Athanasian Creed, that we
have great reason to be thankful for being furnished with
an accurate copy of it in the facsimile of the Palaeo-
graphical Society. From this source I have printed it in
Appendix A.
been very frequently, indeed commonly, described
It has
as the Colbertine MS. of the Athanasian Creed Colbertine,

because the MS.
containing it belonged originally to the
Library of Colbert, the Minister of Louis XIV. And the
result of this has been that an undue weight has been
attached to it for determining the true readings and text of

the Creed. But this view is entirely erroneous ;
and it is
specially necessary to note the error on account of the

mischievous consequences with which it is fraught. The
fragment, important to remember, is not a copy of the
it is
Athanasian Creed, nor yet of a part of it but it is a copy :
of the conclusion of a Sermon delivered to Catechumens at

'
'
the Traditio Symboli the ceremony preparatory to
i.]
Testimonies. 9
in the Apostles'
Baptism in which they were instructed
Creed and the preacher, as
;
I have already said, therein
of the doctrine of the Incarnation,
gives an exposition
which obviously, though not avowedly, is built upon the
lines of the Quicunqtte, and to a certain extent, indeed
a large extent, employs its very language. That this is
the true nature of the document, is obvious in the first
place from the remarkable variations which it presents

when contrasted with the text of the Athanasian Creed
as found in all ancient MSS., among which the diversity is
notably small. And next, this is obvious from the fact of
its modifying the words of the Creed for the purpose of
a discourse. Thus instead of inde venturus iudicare vivos
'
'
et mortuos we find,
'
inde ad iudicandos vivos et mortuos
credimus et speramus eum esse venturum.' And thirdly, it
contains a distinct allusion to the

ceremony of the Traditio
'
Symboli' in the words introduced immediately after the

article 'ad dexteram Dei Patris sedet,' viz. 'sicut vobis
in symbolo traditum est.' It must be remarked also that
these words occur immediately before the words inde ad
'
iudicandos/ &c. just quoted, taken in connexion with which

they show very plainly and vividly that this fragment was
not only part of a Sermon, but of one addressed to Cate-
chumens at the Traditio Symboli.'
'
Such being the true account of the Treves

fragment, it
follows that although it is not a
copy of the Athanasian
Creed nor of a part of it, still it is of the greatest value as
evidence of antiquity, the Creed being the basis, as we
its
have seen, and

supplying to some extent the very wording
of the doctrinal
teaching on the Incarnation contained in it
or rather in the
Sermon, of which it formed a part. What
was the date of this Sermon? This it would be important
to ascertain, if order to arrive at a true estimate
possible, in
io Documentary Evidence. [CH.
of its testimony to the antiquity of the Creed. And thus

much may be asserted with safety, that it could not have
been composed later than the seventh century, the MS., in
which a portion of it is preserved, belonging to the eighth.
We do not know what was the document found by the
writer, of the Paris MS. at Treves, whether it contained the
whole Sermon or only the fragment which he transcribed ;
nor yet how long it had been there, nor how long before it
was written, nor yet whether it was the autograph, i. e. the
original copy, in part, or a copy from that, or one

whole or
of a succession of copies. It is very improbable that it
was the autograph. The writer of the Paris MS. does not
seem to have considered it a recent contemporary docu-
ment. Some period must have elapsed we may reasonably
believe not less than fifty years between the composition
of the Sermon and the time when the scribe met with this
fragment of it at Treves. And while the Sermon must

thus be a work of the seventh century at the latest, there is
some internal evidence which points to the sixth century as
the more probable era of its production. According to the
preacher or homilist, the article of the Apostles' Creed

respecting our Lord's session at the right hand of the
Father at the time of his preaching the Sermon was as
'
follows ad dexteram dei patris sedet

:
'
for he refers ;
his hearers to thesewords as just delivered to them in the

symbol or Apostles' Creed 'sicut vobis in symbolo tra-
ditum est.' But in the seventh century this article of the
Creed generally found with the word omnipotentis annexed
is
to Dr. Heurtley says l :

it.
'
We
do not meet with Dei
Patris omnipotentis till it occurs in the Creed of Eusebius
Gallus, nor again till it occurs in the Creeds of the Codex
Bobiensis in the middle of the seventh century. From that
1
Hannonia Symbolica, p. 138.
1 1
lp
i Testimonies.
considered established.' The Creed of

time it may be
to the sixth
Eusebius Callus, by the way, is referred
the Codex Bobiensis are contained
century the Creeds of
:
in a Gallican Sacramentary found by

Mabillon in the
North If he right in
Monastery of Bobio in is
Italy.
to the middle of the seventh century,
assigning the MS.
the type of the Creed which it presents cannot be of
a later and may have been used earlier. The usual
date,
earlier form is 'ad dexteram Patris.' 'Ad dexteram Dei
Hahn, in his Bibliothek der Symbole,
'
Patris is very unusual.
cites three instances of it, one of which occurs in St.
ccxv. It occurs
Augustine's Serino in Redditione Symboli,
also in the discourse on the Apostles' Creed previously
noticed as contained in two Paris MSS. No instance
seems to be known of this article being used in the
seventh century or after without omnipotentis. Nor is the
occurrence of the words ad inferna descendens/ in obvious
'
reference to the Apostles' Creed, inconsistent with the

hypothesis that this Sermon was a work of the sixth
'
century, inasmuch as
'
descendit ad inferna was an article
of the Aquileian Creed in the time of Rufinus, and appears
also in a Spanish Creed of the sixth century, and in the
Creed as expounded by Caesarius, Bishop of Aries, in the
same century, and as commented on by Venantius Fortu-
natus, Bishop of Poictiers, in the latter part of the same
century. Nor can

a later date be assigned to the Creed
printed by Blanchini from a Verona MS., in which this
article is also found.
Thus we arrive at the conclusion that the Sermon,

a fragment of which MS. No.
is preserved in the Latin
3836 of the Bibliotheque Nationale at Paris, and which
adapts and modifies much of the language of the Athana-
1
See Hahn, Bibliothek der
Symbole, pp. 25, 28, 35, 42.
sian Creed on the subject of the Incarnation, was certainly

not composed later than the seventh century, and prob-
ably belongs to the sixth.

In the Confession of Faith, which was composed and
5.
promulgated by the Fourth Council of Toledo A.D. 633,

several expressions occur bearing an obvious resemblance
to the Athanasian Creed, viz. 'Nee personas confundi-
:
mus nee substantiam separamus. Patrem a nullo factum

vel genitum dicimus ;
Filium a Patre non factum, sed
genitum asserimus Spiritum vero Sanctum nee creatum
;
nee genitum, sed procedentem ex Patre et Filio pro-

fitemur: ipsum autem Dominum lesum Christum Filium
Dei ... ex substantia Patris ante secula genitum aequa-
lis Patri secundum divinitatem, minor Patre secundum
humanitatem perferens passionem et mortem pro nostra
salute descendit ad inferos. Haec est Ecclesiae Catho-
licae fides, hanc confessionem servamus atque tenemns,
quam quisquis firmissime custodierit, perpetuam salutem
habebit Vused to be of opinion that the resemblance
I
between these expressions of the Confession of Faith of the

Fourth Council of Toledo and the corresponding passages
of the Qtiicunque was nothing more than the result of both
Confessions of Faith giving utterance to the common
terminology of Catholicity. More mature consideration has
convinced me of the correctness of Water! and's view, that
the relationship between the two confessions is of a much
closer nature, the Toledan being drawn from the Athana-
sian. My
grounds for this conclusion are as follows :
Firstly, in two of the above instances the terminology is

of too unusual and peculiar a nature to be set down as the
common language of Catholicity. Thus in the words
'
'
perferens passionem et mortem pro nostra salute of the

1
Labbe, Concilia, torn. x. p. 615. Florentiae, 17(14.
I3
Testimonies.
i.]
Toledan confession, and in the obviously corresponding

nostra' we
passus pro salute
'
expression of the Quicunque,

may assert with
find a terminology, which I believe
I
safety but peculiar to these two Confessions of Faith.

is all
In other confessions, with one exception, where any

men-
tion is made of the saving benefits of Christ's work,
it is
made connexion with His mission into the world and

in
Incarnation, not His Passion, and we have propter

salutem
nostram not pro salute nostra. In the Nicene and Con-

stant inopolitan Creeds we say '
for us men and for our salva-
tion \
'
He came down from heaven and was incarnate,' &c. ;
and the language of the Union Creed of the Antiochenes,

A. D. 433, an d f the Synod of Constantinople, A. D. 448,
was the same. of the Western Church, or

The Creed
Apostles' Creed, simply mentions the fact of our Lord's
Passion under Pontius Pilate. Confessions of Latin doctors
assert with the Greek Creeds,, that He came down from
heaven, propter nostram salutem,' or the like. So that of
'
Auxentius of Milan, the Damasi Symbolum, the Fides Ro-

manorum. In one only can I find exactly the same phrase,
viz. inthe Confession of Pelagius I, which has pro nostra '
salute passum 2 .' The other instance of doctrinal terminology
peculiar wellnigh to the Confession of the Fourth of Toledo

and the Quicunqtee is in the words descendit ad inferosl
'
which occur in both. It has been already mentioned that

in theseventh century the article of the Descent into Hell
had found its way generally into the Creed of the West,
but differently expressed, in the form, '
namely, descendit
in inferna,' or '
ad infernum,' or ad inferna.' The only
'
Confession of Faith in which 'descendit ad inferos'

appears,
*
Si'
Tâs TOVS dvOpuirovs KCU Stci TT)I/ fj^repav ffaiTrjpiav ;
in the Latin trans-
lation, 'propter nos homines et salutem nostram.'
2
Symbole, pp. 78, 83, 137, 139, 197, 204, 270.
besides the two we are specially referring to, is Irish it
appears in the Antiphonary of Bangor, which is preserved

in an Irish MS. of the eighth century belonging to the
Ambrosian Library at Milan 1 . The fact of this peculiar
terminology being found in these two confessions points

clearly to the existence of a close connexion between them
closer than that of a common Catholicity. Either the
Quicunque must have drawn from the Toledan Confession

or the Toledan Confession from the Quicunqtie. That the
latter was the case we are led to believe by the com-
mencing words of this very Toledan Confession, in which
the bishops and doctors, by whom it was formulated and
'
subscribed, affirm it to be in accordance with the Divine

Scriptures and the doctrine or teaching ivhich we have re-
ceived from the holy Fathers^.' And I am confirmed in this

belief by finding, on a closer examination of the Toledan
Confession of Faith, that besides the expressions bearing
an evident resemblance to the language of the Athanasian
Creed it contains others, clearly derived, as from their
sources, from two other ancient Confessions of Faith, which
are distinct documents, though possessing much in common,
the one sometimes described in MSS. as '
Fides Romanae
ecclesiae,' sometimes as '
Fides Romanorum,' sometimes
attributed Augustine, sometimes to Athanasius, the
to
other commonly known as Damasi Fides,' but frequently
'
attributed to St. Jerome in ancient MSS. These two

Confessions, together with Creed, are the Athanasian
found in a series of twelve ancient Confessions of Faith
which appears in two MSS. of the Bibliotheque Nationale,

Latin 2076 and 2341 the Athanasian Creed being de-
;
1
Hahn, p. 41.
2
'Secundnm divinas Scripturas et doctrinam, quam a sanctis Patritms
accepimus."
Testimonies. 15
i.]
scribed as Fides catholica dicta a sancto Athanasio epi-

'
'
scopo Alexandrino,' the Damasi symbolum as 'Fides

'
catholica dicta a sancto iheronimo presbitero,' and the

Fides catholica ab ortodoxis
' '
'
Fides Romanorum as
as
'
Exemplar fidei catholice.' The

patribus exposita,' also
Toledan fathers must have had these three documents before
them, and gathered from thence the materials for the
1
construction of their own confession .
6. The next document I desire to refer to as affording
evidence of the antiquity of the Athanasian Creed is the
profession of obedience made by Denebert to Ethelheard,

Archbishop of Canterbury, at his consecration as Bishop of
the Huiccii, i.e. of Worcester, A.D. 798. After avowing
his purpose of obedience, Denebert proceeds to declare his
faith in the Holy Trinity in terms obviously culled from the
'
Creed :
Orthodoxam, catholicam apostolicamque fidem,
sicut didici, paucis exponam verbis, quia scriptum est gui-
ctingue vii.lt salvus esse, ante omnia opus est illi ut teneat
catholicam fidem. Fides autem catholica haec est, ut unum
Dcum in Trinitate et Trinitatem in Unitate vencremur ;
nequc confundentes personas neque stibstantiam separantes.
Alia enim est persona Pair is, alia Filii, alia
Spirits
Sancti: sed Patris et Filii et Spiritus Sancti nna est
Dtvinitas, aequalis gloria, coaeterna majestas. Pater a
nullo factus est, nee creatzis nee FHius a Patre solo
genitus :
non facttis nee creatus, sed

est,
genitus :
Spirits a Patre et
Filio, non factus nee crcatus nee genitus, sed procedens. In
1
For some account of the Fides Romanorum and the
' '
'
Damasi Symbolum,'
I may
refer to my book entitled
Early History of the Athanasian Creed, pp.
202-212. Copies of both from Paris MSS. are
printed in Appendix H of the
same volume. They are also to be found in Hahn's
Bibliolhek, the former as
the 'Erste Formel' of the
symbols ascribed to Damasus, the latter as the
Zwezte Forrnel/ pp.
204 and 207. The 'Fides Romanorum' is the com-
bination of two shorter confessions, which in their separate
appear form in the
same Mb., as the Treves fragment.
sian Creed on the subject of the Incarnation, was certainly

not composed later than the seventh century, and prob-
ably belongs to the sixth.

In the Confession of Faith, which was composed and
5.
promulgated by the Fourth Council of Toledo A.D. 633,

several expressions occur bearing an obvious resemblance
to the Athanasian Creed, viz. :
'
Nee personas confundi-
mus nee substantiam separamus. Patrem a nullo factum
vel genitum dicimus ;
Filium a Patre non factum, sed
genitum asserimus Spiritum vero Sanctum nee creatum
;
nee genitum, sed procedentem ex Patre et Filio pro-

fitemur ipsum autem Dominum lesum Christum Filium
:
Dei ... ex substantia Patris ante secula genitum aequa-

lis Patri secundum divinitatem, minor Patre secundum
humanitatem perferens passionem et mortem pro nostra
salute descendit ad inferos. Haec est Ecclesiae Catho-
licae hanc confessionem servamus atque tenemns,
fides,
quam quisquis firmissime custodierit, perpetuam salutem

habebit V I used to be of opinion that the resemblance
between these expressions of the Confession of Faith of the
Fourth Council of Toledo and the corresponding passages
of the Quicunqiie was nothing more than the result of both
Confessions of Faith giving utterance to the common
terminology of Catholicity. More mature consideration has

convinced me of the correctness of Waterland's view, that
the relationship between the two confessions is of a much
closer nature, the Toledan being drawn from the Athana-
sian. My grounds for this conclusion are as follows :
Firstly, in two of the above instances the terminology is

of too unusual and peculiar a nature to be set down as the
common language of Catholicity. Thus in the words
'pcrfcrcns passionem ct mortem pro nostra salute' of the
1
J.ithhc, Concilia, turn. x. p. 615. Florentine,

L Testimonies. 13
]
Toledan confession, and in the obviously corresponding

'
passus pro salute nostra' we

expression of the Quicunque,
which I believe I may assert with
find a. terminology,
safety but peculiar to these two Confessions of Faith.

is all
In other confessions, with one exception, where any men-

tion is made of the saving benefits of Christ's work, it is
made connexion with His mission into the world and
in
Incarnation, not His Passion, and we have propter salutem

nostrum not pro salute nostra. In the Nicene and Con-
stant inopolitan Creeds we say for us men and for our salva-
'
tion 1
.
'
He came down from heaven and was incarnate,' &c. ;
and the language of the Union Creed of the Antiochenes,

A. D. 433, an<3 f the Synod of Constantinople, A. D. 448,
was the same. The Creed

of the Western Church, or
Apostles' Creed, simply mentions the fact of our Lord's

Passion under Pontius Pilate. Confessions of Latin doctors
assert with the Greek Creeds,, that He came down from
heaven, propter nostram salutem,' or the like. So that of
'
Auxentius of Milan, the Damasi Symbolum, the Fides Ro-

manorum. In one only can I find exactly the same phrase,
viz. inthe Confession of Pelagius I, which has pro nostra '
salute passum 2 .' The other instance of doctrinal terminology
peculiar wellnigh to the Confession of the Fourth of Toledo

and the Quicimque is in the words '
descendit ad inferosl
which occur in both. has been already mentioned that
It
in the seventh the article of the Descent into Hell
century
had found its way generally into the Creed of the West,
but differently expressed, in the form, '
namely, descendit
in inferna,' or ad infernum,' or ad inferna.' The only
' '
Confession of Faith in which 'descendit ad inferos' appears,
St'
f/nas rovs avOpuirovs not 5td TT)J/ Tjnerfpav aairrjpiav ;
in the Latin trans-
lation, 'propter nos homines et salutem nostram.'
2
Symlole, pp. 78, 83, 137, 139, 197, 204, 270.
besides the two we are specially referring to, is Irish it
appears in the Antiphonary of Bangor, which is preserved

in an Irish MS. of the eighth century belonging to the
Ambrosian Library at Milan 1 . The fact of this peculiar
terminology being found in these two confessions points

clearly to the existence of a close connexion between them
closer than that of a common Catholicity. Either the
Quicunque must have drawn from the Toledan Confession

or the Toledan Confession from the Qtdcunque. That the
latter was the case we are led to believe by the com-
mencing words of this very Toledan Confession, in which
the bishops and doctors, by whom it was formulated and
subscribed, affirm it to be
'
in accordance with the Divine
Scriptures and the doctrine or teaching which we have re-
ceived from the holy Fathers^? And I am confirmed in this

belief by rinding, on a closer examination of the Toledan
Confession of Faith, that besides the expressions bearing
an evident resemblance to the language of the Athanasian
Creed it contains others, clearly derived, as from their
sources, from two other ancient Confessions of Faith, which
are distinct documents, though possessing much in common,
the one sometimes described in MSS. as Fides Romanae '
ecclesiae,' sometimes as '

Fides Romanorum,' sometimes
attributed to Augustine, sometimes to Athanasius, the
other commonly known as Damasi Fides,' but frequently '
attributed to St. Jerome in ancient MSS. These two

Confessions, together with the Athanasian Creed, are
found in a series of twelve ancient Confessions of Faith
which appears in two MSS. of the Bibliotheque Nationale,
Latin 2076 and 2341 the Athanasian Creed being de-
;
1
Hahn, p. 41.
2
'Secundum divinas Scripturas et doctrinam, quam a sanctis Patribus
accepimus.'
Testimonies. 15
scribed as Fides catholica dicta a sancto Athanasio epi-

'
scopo Alexandrine,' the

Damasi symbolum' as 'Fides'
catholicadicta a sancto iheronimo presbitero,' and the

'
Fides Romanorum
'
as
'
Fides catholica ab ortodoxis
as '
Exemplar fidei catholice.' The

patribus exposita,' also
Toledan fathers must have had these three documents before
the
them, and gathered from thence the materials for
construction of their own confession *.
6. The next document I desire to refer to as affording
evidence of the antiquity of the Athanasian Creed is the

profession of obedience made by Denebert to Ethelheard,
Archbishop of Canterbury, at his consecration as Bishop of
the Huiccii, i.e. of Worcester, A.D. 798. After avowing
his purpose of obedience, Denebert proceeds to declare his
faith in the Holy Trinity in terms obviously culled from the
'
Creed :
Orthodoxam, catholicam apostolicamque fidem,
sicut didici, paucis exponam verbis, quia scriptum est qui-
cimque vult salvns esse, ante omnia opus est illi lit teneat
catholicam fidem. Fides autem catholica haec est, ut unum

Dcum in Trinitate et Trinitatem in Unitate vencremur ;
neque confwidentes personas neque sitbstantiam separantes.
Alia enim est persona Pair is, alia Filii, alia Spiritus
Sancti: sed Patris et Filii et Spiritus Sancti nna est
Divinitas, aeqnalis gloria, coaeterna majestas. Pater a
nullo facttis est, nee creatits nee Patre
genitus : Filiiis a solo
est, non factus nee creatus, sed genitus : a Patre et
Spirittis
Filio, 11011 factus nee crcatus nee genittts, sed procedens. In
1
For some account of the Fides Romanorum and the Damasi
' '
'
Symbolum,'
I may refer to my book entitled
Early History of the Athanasian Creed, pp.
202-212.
Appendix H of the
Copies of both
from Paris MSS. are printed in
same volume. They are also to be found in Harm's
' '
Biblio/hck, the former as
the Erste Formel of the symbols ascribed to
1
Damasus, the latter as the
'Zweite Formel, pp. 204 and The 'Fides Romanorum' is the com-
207.
bination of two shorter
confessions, which appear in their separate form in the
same MS., as the Treves
fragment.
i6 Documentary Evidence. [CH.
hac Trinitate nihil prius aut posterity, nihil majus aut

minus, sed totae tres personae co-aeternae sibi sunt et
coaeqitales. Ita tit per omnia, sicut supra dictum est, et
Trinitas in Unitate et Unitas in Trinitate veneranda sit.
Suscipio etiam decreta Pontificum et sex synodos catholicas

antiquorum heroicorum virorum, et praefixam ab iis regu-
lam sincera devotione conserve. Haec est fides nostra,
evangelicis et apostolicis traditionibus atque auctoritate

firmata, et omnium quae in hoc mundo sunt catholicarum
ecclesiarum societate fundata qua nos per gratiam Dei
;
in
Omnipotentis permanere usque ad finem vitae hujus con-

fidimus et speramus. Amen 1 .'
It will be noticed that Denebert introduces his brief

' 2
abstract from the Quicunque by the term scriptum est /
indicating that he was quoting from a well-known and

authoritative document one, too, which apparently, if we
judge from the expression ut didici,' he had learnt by
'
may
heart. Brevity of exposition being avowedly his object, he
does not go on to employ the language of the Creed for
expounding his faith in the Incarnation, deeming it suffi-
cient for this purpose to declare his adhesion to the six
Oecumenical Councils. Hence his omission to quote the
latter part of the Creed can afford no presumption in
support of the hypothesis that in his time it existed only
in an imperfect, embryo state.
7. Among the works of Alcuinis printed a Libellus de
Processione Spiritus Sancti ad Carohim Magnum. The

work consists of quotations from the Fathers and the ;
Athanasian Creed twice quoted, on both occasions as the

is
work of Athanasius. ' The blessed Athanasius, the most
1
See Councils and Ecclesiastical Documents, edited by A. W. Haddan and
W. Stubbs, vol. iii. p. 525.
a
The use of this term in St. Matt. iv. 4, 7, 10, may be considered.
i.]
Testimonies. 17
"
reverend bishop of the city of Alexandria, ... in the Ex-
position of the Catholic Faith,"

which that eminent doctor
himself composed, and which the universal Church (uni-
versalis ecclesia) confesses, declares the procession of the
Holy Ghost from the Father and the Son, thus saying,
"
The Father is made of none," &c. The twentieth and
'
two following verses down to but proceeding,' are then '
quoted. The other quotation is not noticed by Water-

"
land For such as the Father is," as the blessed Athana-
:
'
"
sius, bishop of the city of Alexandria testifies,
such also
is the Son, such also is the Holy Ghost, for in this Trinity
none is before/'
'
&c. The quotation is continued to the
end of the twenty-sixth verse, '
Let him thus think of the
1
Trinity .' The of Alcuin, Frobenius, places this
editor
treatise among his genuine works upon the authority of
a MS. of the
ninth century, in which it appears with
the title, 'Alcuinus de Processione Spiritus sancti.' The
codex was given to the cathedral church of Laon by
Dido, who was bishop of that see in the latter part of the
ninth century, his death having occurred in 891. So that
it could not have been written
long after the time of
Alcuin. There seems therefore good ground for attri-
buting the treatise to and, him

is his work, it must ; if it
have been written between the year 8co, when Charle-

magne was crowned Emperor for it is dedicated to him
in that '
Serenissimo Angusto Carolo'
character, and the
year 804, when Alcuin died.
may very well have been It
written at that as the Procession was a prominent
epoch,
subject of discussion at the close of the
eighth century,
having been mooted at the Council of Gentiliacum in 867.
If it is not
genuine, the dedication still shows it to have
1
Migne, Patrologia Latina, torn. ci.
82; Alcuini Libelhis de
pp. 73,
J i. and
rocesstone, cap. cap. iii.
been written before the year 814, the date of Charle-

magne's death. Thus, whether it was composed by Alcuin
or not, it affords a remarkable testimony to the wide-
spread reception of the Quicunque at the commencement of

the ninth century, as well as to the fact that it was then
considered to be the work of Athanasius.
Side by side with the last-named work may fitly be
8.
adduced another of the same age and dealing with the

same subject, The Procession of the Holy Spirit, written
byTheodulf, Bishop of Orleans, at the command of Charle-

magne. This also consists of a series of quotations from
the Fathers, and quotes the Quicunque as the work of
it
Athanasius, citing from the twentieth to the twenty-sixth

verses inclusive, from the words The Father is made of '
him thus think of the Trinity V

'
none to
'
let
9. In the year 809, the Latin monks of Mount Olivet at
Jerusalem wrote to the Pope respecting a dispute which

had arisen between themselves and some Greek monks
headed by John of the monastery of St. Sabas. The letter
alludes particularly to the introduction of the Filioqiie into

the Nicene or rather Constantinopolitan Creed, as one of
the subjects of debate and adduces several authorities in
support of the assertion of the double procession, among

them the Athanasian Creed, which it entitles
'
Fides S.
2
Athanasii .'
After the death of Felix of Orgel in 818, a document

10.
was found among his papers reaffirming the errors of Adop-

tionism which he had abjured ;
and with the view of
confuting them Agobard, Bishop of Lyons, composed a
treatise consisting mainly, like those of Theodulf and
Alcuin already mentioned, of citations from the Fathers.
1
See Migne, Patrol. Lai., torn. cv. p. 247.
2
The epistle of the Franck monks is edited in Baluzii Miscellanea, torn. ii.
p. 84.
i.]
Testimonies. 19
The third section asserts the necessity of a belief in the

'
Catholic Faith in the very language of the Creed But :
he who does not condescend to read what proceeds from

ourselves, may rest satisfied with the judgements of the
holy Fathers here annexed, because the blessed Athana-
slus says. Except a man keep the Catholic Faith ivhole and
undefiled without doubt he shall perish everlastingly 1 .
No one can doubt that it is the second verse of the Qiti-

cunque which is here quoted by Agobard ;
and he quotes
the words as those of Athanasius.
u. Baluze in his Miscellanea'2 has printed 'Ex veteri
'
codice MS. Bibliothecae Colbertinae,' a catalogue of the

first fourteen abbots of the celebrated Benedictine monas-
tery of Fleury on the Loire, subjoined to which is a brief

notice respecting Theodulf, the last-named in the list, con-
taining several particulars of his life and writings which

are not found elsewhere. Among other things it states
that he wrote expositions of the Mass and the Athanasian

Creed. My
principal reason for drawing attention to this
interesting and important document here, lies in the in-
cidental mention which it makes of the daily recital of the
Creed at the hour of Prime as the contemporaneous prac-

tice of monks :
'
explanationem says of Theodulf,

edidit,' it
'
symboli sancti Athanasii, quod a monachis post tres regu-

lares psalmos ad prim am cotidie canitur.' This passage
is adduced by Martene as evidence of the ancient use
by the Benedictines of the Qtdcunque in the office of
Prime 3 The document is clearly subsequent in date to
.
1 '
Beatus Athanasius ait, Fidem Catholicam nisi quis integrant inviola-
tamque servaverit, absqtte dulrio in aetermim feribit' Agobardus adversus
Felicem see Migne, Patrol. Latina, torn. cv. p. 35.
:
2
Balnzii Miscellaneomm liber primus, pp. 491, 492.
3
Martene, De anliqiiis monachorum ritibus, lib. i.
cnp. iv. p. 17, ed.
1788.
C 3
the abbacy of Theodulf, which it mentions as having con-

tinued nineteen years and a half. In all probability it
was drawn up soon after its termination, during the time
of his successor, his name being the last, as already men-
tioned, in the series of abbots which it contains. This
appears the more probable from the fact of the author
all
being himself a monk of Fleury, as is shown by his descrip-

tion of a place named Germaniacus, the modern Germigny,
where Theodulf had built a magnificent church, as being
three miles distant from our monastery
l
. The terms of
admiration which he uses, and the particulars he states
respecting Theodulf, would seem to indicate a personal
knowledge and attachment. For these reasons we may
document was composed not many years
believe that this
after the death of Theodulf, which took place in 821. The
MS. from which Baluze printed being represented as it,
ancient, cannot be supposed to be later than the tenth

century, and might be of the ninth. Monsieur Cuissard,
in his recent Life of Theodulf, refers to the latter date
2
another MS. of it No. 306 in the Library of Berne .
This is the earliest notice extant of the use of the

Athanasian Creed by Benedictines, we may say of its
monastic use, for it is not in the Rule of St. Benedict,
i. e. it was not inserted by him in the Offices drawn up
3
for his order . Of course it does not follow from thence
that the Quicunque was not in use among the Benedictines
1
Monsieur Lebeuf, 1755, speaks of the church as situated the same
in
distance from the of Fleury.
Abbey In 1839 it was placed in the class of
historic monuments, and in 1861 was renovated and restored. See Theodulfe
sa vie et ses ceuvres, par Ch. Cuissard. Orleans, 1892, pp. 121, 122.
2
U. s. p. 1 20.
'
So Meratus states
:!
In regula S. Benedict! nulla eius fit mentio.'
:
Observationes ad Gavanti Commentariwn see Gavanti, Thesaums, torn. ii.

;
p. 173. So also Grancolas, La Litwgie de V Office divin, p. 333. Paris,

1752.
Testimonies. 21
i.]
prior to the epoch to which this catalogue of Fleury

abbots belongs and it is far from improbable that it was
:
recited by them before the ninth century, though we

cannot affirm it as a fact. Martene, while adducing the
above evidence of the early admission of the Quicunque
into the Benedictine Office, mentions also two other in-
stances in point. The first of them testifies to its use
at Prime in the Abbey of St. Aper or St. Evre at Toul
in Lorraine, the second bears the same testimony in
regard Abbey
to the of St. Denis near Paris ;
in both
too it appears to have been recited daily, but certainly
in the former 1 .
12. A letter from Florus the Deacon to Hyldrad the

Abbot of great interest and importance, as proving that
is
in the first half of the ninth century the Athanasian Creed
was generally admitted into Psalters and had been so

admitted for some considerable time. This document was
first edited by Cardinal Mai in 1828 from a manuscript in
the Vatican Library 2 The writer of the letter, several of
.
whose works are extant, flourished from about A. D. 830 to

the middle of the century, and was esteemed one of the
most learned men of his day. It appears that Hyldrad
had sent him a Psalter with a request that he would correct
it. Florus in his reply dwells upon the difficulty of the
task, arising from the great and increasing number of
faulty
1 '
Tribns hisce psalmis subinngebant olim nostri '
i. e. the Benedictines, to
which order Martene himself belonged' Symbolum Athanasii dictum, ut
S.
discimus ex catalogo Abbatum Floriacensium. . . . Idem patet ex Tullensi
S. " Omnibus diebus
Apri ordinario Dominicis infra preces post Domine
exaudi dicat Quicunqiie milt ; ceteris autem diebus dicatur
Quicnnque vult
ante antiphonam. Et infra in feria 2. ad lam lucis." primam hymnns Idem
videre est in MS. S. Dionysii consuetudinibus.' De
Martene, antiquis mona-
chorum ritilnts, lib. i.
cap. iv. torn. iv. p. 17, ed.
1788.
2
Maij Scriptonim veterum nova Collcctio, torn. iii.
pp. 251-255. Rome '
1828.
copies, but says that he had done his best to correct the text
by collating Jerome's translation, the Septuagint and the

original Hebrew. He adds that he was aware of Hyldrad's
wish to produce a new Psalter, and after giving some advice
in regard to the execution of the book proceeds as follows
'
Avith regard to the contents : Psalmis vero sola cantica
1
copulentur Hymnis
.
(sic\ symbolum, oratio dominica,
2
Fides. Compunctum , orationes, et
qnae si alia, libello
altero conscribantur. Quanquam a nobis ex his omnibus

solum symbolum, oratio evangelica, fides catholica, atque
hymni correcti sunt; reliqua vel superstitiosa vel falsa
velparum necessaria iudicantibus po- ; unde, et si vultis,
Psalmis CL, canticis propheticis, evangelicis duobus,

teritis
ea quae supra nos correxisse diximus, eo, quo a nobis

commemorata sunt, ordine copulare. Alia abicite, ac velut
quasdam vestri sordes psalterii fullonis vecte decutite ;

ut
libelli illius corpus, omni labe detersa, purum et nitidum
resplendeat.' The spelling and punctuation are given here
' '
as they are in Mai. That by Fides and Fides catholica

' '
in theabove passage the Athanasian Creed is especially,

though it may be not exclusively, intended, it is impossible
to doubt, as each ofthem is distinguished from 'symbolum,'
the Apostles' Creed, and the Quicunqtie is sometimes en-
titled Fides Catholica,' for instance, in the Utrecht Psalter,
f
which may be probably assigned to the same epoch as this

letter of Florus, and it is generally found in Psalters, while
the Nicene, or Constantinopolitan, Creed appears in them
seldom, comparatively speaking.
appears that in Florus's time some superstitious and
It
spurious and unnecessary matter had found its way into

Psalters. In his anxiety to exclude everything of a question-
1
This full-stop must be an error of the press.
'
2
An error probably for computum.'
'
i,l Testimonies. 23
able nature, he recommends Hyldrad to subjoin nothing

to the Psalms but the scriptural Canticles Cantica and to
relegate all other matter usually

annexed to Psalters to
a separate volume. But he suggests an alternative plan,
which he seems to prefer. He would separate the sound
metal from the dross. He had therefore selected the
Apostles' Creed, the Lord's Prayer, the Athanasian
Creed, and the Hymns, i.e. doubtless the Te Deum and
the Gloria in Excelsis, and corrected their texts. These
Hyldrad might, if he thought fit, subjoin to the Psalms
and Canticles from Scripture. All besides should be un-
sparingly rejected.
That the Athanasian Creed, with the Apostles' Creed,
Lord's Prayer, and Hymns, were found in Psalters generally
in Florus's time, is evident first from his primary recom-
mendation that they should be included in a separate
volume together with the objectionable and unnecessary
matter. Such a recommendation to separate them in this
particular case from the Psalter implies that usually they

were annexed to it, and would have been needless, unless
thishad been the case. This is evident also from his
alternative advice. What was thus rejected from the
Psalter must have been previously attached to it, and.
what was not thus rejected must have been simply
retained in its usual position. Florus's advice throughout
proceeds upon the assumption that there was nothing
novel or unusual in the admission of the
Quicunqtte
to a Psalter. placed in the same category with the
It is
Apostles' Creed and Lord's Prayer, marked out by a clear

line of distinction from the
superstitious and spurious and
unnecessary.
This testimony to the use of the was
Quicnnque
necessarily unknown to Waterland.
33. In his work De

non trina Deitate> written
turn et
A.D. 857, Hincmar, Archbishop of Rheims, the leading

ecclesiastic of the day, repeatedly -quotes the Athanasian
Creed. He quotes it as the work of Athanasius, and
applies to it
apparently the title
'
Fides Catholica.' The
verses quoted are the first to the sixth inclusive, the
twenty-fourth and twenty-fifth. This treatise was written

for the purpose of confuting the opinions on the subject
of the Holy Trinity asserted by Gotheschalcus with
specialreference to the term 'trina Deitas,' occurring in

a hymn, the use of which, though forbidden by Hincmar,
had been persistently maintained by Gotheschalcus. At
the conclusion is subjoined a doctrinal formula, drawn
up by Hincmar, and presented by him to Gotheschalcus
on his death-bed with the promise of restoration to
Catholic Communion on condition of its sincere acceptance :
for the latter had incurred the penalty of excommunica-
tion. The portion of this document relating to the

Trinity consists simply of verses 3-6, 24 and 25 of the
Q,^l^cunq^le, with some explanatory words thrown in here
and there : it is preceded
by the following introduction :
'
Sic crede et confitere, sicut credit, confitetur et praedicat
'
sancta catholica et apostolica Ecclesia dicens. 1 In the
De una et non trina Deitate, Hincmar quotes necessarily
from the firstpart of the Creed only, that being alone
relevant to his purpose but in his Explanatio in fercnlum
;
Salomonis, which refers to the Incarnation as well as the
Trinity, he quotes from both parts. It is perfectly evident
that the Athanasian

Creed was familiar as household
words to Hincmar and the language of the schedule or
;
formula addressed to Gotheschalcus, which is quoted above,
1
Migne, Patrologia Latina, torn. cxxv. p. 616.
Testimonies. 25
shows that in his time it was considered to be a Creed

of the Catholic Church.
of the death of Anscharius, Arch-
14. In the account
bishop of Hamburg
and Bremen, which took place in
it is mentioned that on
the night before his
the year 865,
whilst the ministering priests were singing the
death,
recited for the departing,
Litany and the Psalms usually
he requested them also to sing the Te Deum and the
1
Athanasian Creed .
15. Ratramn or Bertram,

a monk of Corbie in France,
Graecorum the
in his work Contra opposita, quotes
twentieth and two following verses of the Creed 'The

Father is made of none,' &c. in reference to the doctrine
of the Procession of the Holy Spirit, and he describes it
as
'
the little book respecting the faith, which the blessed
Athanasius, Bishop of Alexandria, published and proposed
2
for the acceptance of all Catholics .' Ratramn's treatise
was written in consequence of a letter, addressed by Pope
Nicholas in 867 to Hincmar and the other archbishops in

the kingdom of Charles the Bald, drawing their attention
to several objections which the Greek Emperors and
Eastern Bishops had raised to tenets and observances of
the Latin Church, one of them being the doctrine of the
Procession of the Holy Spirit from the Father and the Son.
1 '
Fratres vero qni aderant, cum litaniam facerent et psalmos ex more pro
eius exitu decantarent, admonuit ipse, ut etiam hymnum ad laudem Dei com-
positum, id est Te Deum laudamus, pariter cantarent, fidem quoque catholicam
a beato Athanasio compositam.' Vita S. Anscharii auctore S. Remberto eius
discipulo et sitccessore, apud Mabill. Annales ordinis S. Benedicti, torn. vi.
See also Migne, Patrol. Lat. torn, cxviii. pp. 959-961. Rembertus, the
biographer of Anscharius, was his successor in the Archbishopric of Hamburg
and Bremen. Waterland's account of this circumstance is clearly inaccurate.
2 '
Beatus Athanasius Alexandrinus episcopus ... in libello de fide, quern
ediclit et omnibus catholicis tenendum proposuit, inter caetera sic ait : Pater a
nullo est factus,' &c. Ratramni Contra Graecorum opposita, lib. ii.
cap. iii.
See Migne, Patrol. Lat. torn. cxxi. p. 247.

2,6 Documentary Evidence. [CH.
1 6. the same epoch, and in reference to the same

At
controversy, Êneas, Bishop of Paris, wrote a treatise in
opposition to the Greeks. He also quotes the Creed upon
the subject of the Procession, describing it by the title
'Fides catholica/ and as the work of Athanasius. He

quotes more largely than Ratramn the twentieth down
1
to the twenty-sixth verse inclusive .
17. To
same period must be assigned the Profession
the
of Faith made by Adalbertus to Hincmar, as Archbishop
of Rheims, upon his consecration to the Bishopric of
Morinum. This document shows the high estimation in
which the Athanasian Creed was then held, as an authority
upon dogma, and also that its use in the services of the
Catholic Church was then regarded as an old and estab-

'
lished custom. Adalbert describes it as the discourse of
the blessed Athanasius, which the Catholic Church has
been accustomed to repeat in solemn worship, and which
begins thus Whosoever will be saved, before all tilings
:
it is necessary that he hold the Catholic Faith*! He

then proceeds to refer distinctly to both parts of the
Creed, that relating to the Trinity and that relating to the
Incarnation, adopting and using some of their language.
1 8. We have previously noticed a mention of the daily
recital of the Athanasian Creed by the monks of Fleury,
if not by others in the ninth century. Martene states, on
the authority of an ancient charter, that in the celebrated
1
1 ' '
Item idem, i. e. S. Athanasius in Fide catholica :
Quod Spiritus
Sanctus a Patre proccdat et a Filio "
: Pater a nullo est factus . . . ita de
'
Trinitate sentiat." Aeneae
Parisiensis Liber adversus Graecos, cap. xix. See
Migne, Patrol. Lat. torn. cxxi. p. 701.
2 '
Sicnt et in sermone beati Athanasii, quern Ecclesia Catholica venerando
usu frequentare consnevit, qui ita incipit Quicunque milt salmis esse, ante
:
omnia opus est ul teneat Catholicam Fidem.' Professio Adalberti futuri Epi-
scopi Morinensis Hincmaro Remorum Archiepiscopo ante ordinationem oblata.
]3aluzii Capititlaria, torn. ii.
pp. 616, 617. Paris, 16/7.
Testimonies. 27
Li
resolved in the year

church of St. Martin at Tours it was
the
consent of the whole Chapter, 'that
922, with the
of as well on
brethren should all sing at the hour Prime,
which the
Festivals as ordinary days, the Catholic Faith,
the of the Holy
holy Athanasius composed by inspiration
Whosoever will be 'saved
1
: This would
Spirit, that is,
the Quicunque had been said
imply that even before then
at St. Martin's.
daily, Festivals excepted,
the daily recital of the Creed
And was the rule
19.
of the Cluniac Order, which was founded in the tenth
2
century, according to Udalric
.
who was consecrated Bishop of Verona

20. Ratherius,
in the year 931, and died in 978, several times quotes the
Athanasian Creed or refers to it. In his Praeloqida,
written during his imprisonment at Pavia, he adopts much
of terminology in a Confession of his Faith,
its and after
'
alludes to it as ea fides, quam Athanasii

'
dicimus in his ;
Itinerarium he quotes the second verse in his second ;
sermon for Lent the thirty-seventh and thirty-ninth, en-

'
titling it
'
confirmatio catholicae fidei and in his treatise ;
1
Ut cantarent fratres generaliter ad horam primam tarn festis diebus quam
'
et quotidianis Catholicam Fidem, quam S. Athanasius Spiritu Sancto inspirante

composuit, id est, Quicunque vult salvus esse.' Martene, De antiquis ecclesiae
ritilniSf lib. iv. cap. viii. torn, iii, ed. 1788.
/J '
Textus fidei, scilicet Quwmque, a S. Athanasio conscriptus, cuius nonnullae
ecclesiae nee meminerunt Dominica, nullo die omittitur, ut non
nisi in sola
dicatur a nobis.' Consuehidines Cluniacenses per Udalricum. Migne, Patrol.
Lett. torn, cxlix. p. 646. The churches mentioned here by Udalric, who
wrote in the eleventh century, as saying the Athanasian Creed only on Sunday,
were clearly not Cluniac churches, as Martene supposes. The unvarying
custom of the Cluniacs at that time in saying it daily, is put in strong contrast
with the custom of some churches plainly not belonging to their order who
used it only on Sundays. But it may be noticed, that none are mentioned as
'
omitting it altogether. Martene adds Ipsi nihilominus tarn Cluniacenses
:
ex eodem Udalrico quam Carthusienses ex antiquis eorum statutis quotidie

'
symbolum illud' i.e. Athanasianum persolvebant persolvuntque hactenus
Carthusienses et Mediolanenses.' Martene, De antiquis ecclesiae ritibiis,
lib. iv. cap. viii.
s8 Documentary Evidence. [CM.
De contemptu Canomim^ referring to the refusal of the Canons

to recite it, he quotes the last two verses 1
. To his
synodical injunction requiring the recitation of the Creeds,

including the Quicunque, by his clergy, special reference
will be made in the chapter upon Canons.
Towards the close of the same century Abbo Floria-

21.
censis, Abbot of the important monastery of Fleury in
France, incidentally mentions the fact of the Athanasian

Creed being sung antiphonally in the English Church as
well as in France 2 He was a competent witness in
.
regard to the ritual of the English Church, having passed

some time in the Abbey of Ramsey in Huntingdonshire,
which was founded in the reign of Edgar, A. D. 969,

where he presided over the schools, and was occupied
in the promotion of discipline and literature. At the
request of St. Dunstan he wrote the Passion of St. Edmund
the Martyr. Abbo was considered one of the most dis-
tinguished men of his age for learning and piety, and
died in 1004.
22. To the same epoch belongs another evidence, and
a very interesting one, of the use and reception of the
Athanasian Creed in the early English Church one too
which escaped the notice of Waterland. At the commence-
ment of the last century Dr. Wotton drew attention to the
1
Ratherii Praeloquiorum lib. iii. sec. 31, 32; Itinerarium, num. 10;
Sermo II de Quadragesima, sec. 19; De contemptu Canonum, pars i, 24.
Migne, Patrol. Latina, torn, cxxxvi.
2
Primitus de fide dicendum credidi, quam alternantibus choris
'
et in P'rancia
etapud Anglorum Ecclesiam variari audivi. Alii dicunt, ut arbitror, secundum
Athanasium Spirit us Sanctus a Patre et
:
Filio, non factus nee creatus nee
genitus, sed procedens ; alii vero tantum : Spiritiis Sanctus a Patre et Filio,
nonfactns nee creatus, sed procedens qui, dum id quod est nee genitus sub-
trahunt, synodicam domni Gregorii se sequi credunt, ubi est scriptum :
Spiritus Sanettts nee genitus est nee itigenztus, sedtanttun procedens.' Abbonis
Apologeticus, ad Hugonem et Rodbertum reges Francorum. Migne, Patrol,
Latina, torn, cxxxix. p 470.
i.]
Testimonies. 29
fact that an Anglo-Saxon Homily, de Fide Catholica,

which had been published from a MS. belonging to the
Cambridge University Library in the previous century, by
Abraham Wheloc in his edition of Bedes History, to-
gether with a Latin version, contained several expressions
clearly drawn from the Creed and in this fact he found
;
an evident proof of its use and reception in the English

Church about the middle of the tenth century 1 Neither .
Wheloc nor Wotton appear to have known who was the

author of this discourse but it proves to be one of a series
;
of Sermones Catholici or Homilies written by one yElfric,

monk and mass-priest, and expressly intended for popular
use and instruction in the Church at the successive sacred
seasons. They were edited by Benjamin Thorpe for the
Êlfric Society, together with an English version, in 1846.
The Homily commences by stating that it declares the
'
faith which stands in the Creed according to the wise

Augustine's exposition of the holy Trinity.' The following
passages, which I reproduce as rendered in the English
version of Thorpe and the Latin of Wheloc, may be con-
sidered in proof of Wotton's assertion that it draws
expres-
sions from the Qnicunque.
'
For the Father
is one, the Son is
one, and the Holy
Ghost one
and yet of these three there is one
is :
Godhead,
and like glory, and coeternal Alius est Pater, '
majesty.'
alius Filius, alius
Spiritus Sanctus nihilo secius trium :
illorum una est Divinitas, et aequalisque gloria, majestas

' '
Circiter decimi saeculi medium Symbolum illud,' i. e.
Alhacasianum,
,
fccclesiae Anglicanae civitate donatum esse dixi, quod porro mihi constare
videtur ex sermone Saxonico de Fide Catholica, quam 41) Bedae sui
(p.
histonae Ecclesiasticae inseruit Whelocus.
Etenim in
populumegregio isto ad
sermone multa leguntur,
quae homilista ex Symbolo Athanasiano sumpsisse
videtur,_ut phrases ipsae probant.' Linguarum veterum Septentrionalium
thesauri auctore Georgio
. . .
Hickesio, conspectus brevis per Gul. Wottonum.
Notae, p. 75. London, 1708.
aequaliter aeterna.' Compare verses 5 and 6 of the

Athanasian Creed.
'The Father is Almighty God, the Son is Almighty
God, the Holy Ghost is Almighty God and yet there are :
not three Almighty Gods, but one Almighty God.' Om- '
nipotens Deus Pater est, Omnipotens Deus Filius, Omni-

potens Spiritus Sanctus nihilo secius non sunt tres Dii
:
Omnipotentes, sed unus Omnipotens Deus.' Compare

verses 13 and 14.
'The Father is God of no God. The Son is God of
God the Father. The Holy Ghost is God, proceeding
from the Father and from the Son.' '
Pater est Deus
a Deo nullo, Filius Deus est a Deo Patre, Spiritus Sanctus
Deus est a Patre et Filio procedens.'
The Father is Almighty Creator not created nor born 1

'
.'
'
The Son is neither made nor created, but He is begotten.'
'
The Holy Ghost is not made nor created nor begotten,
but He is proceeding.'
'
Quid est Pater ? Omnipotens

'
Creator nee factus nee genitus.' Filius nee factus est nee
'
creatus, sed genitus.' Spiritus Sanctus nee factus est nee
creatus nee genitus, sed procedens.' Compare verses 20,
21, 22.
'
The Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Ghost
is God, not three Gods, but they all three are one Almighty
God.' Pater est Deus, et Filius est Deus, et Spiritus

'
Sanctus est Deus, non tres Dii, verum tres omnes unicus
Omnipotens Deus.' Compare verses 15 and 16.
'
There is so great likeness in this holy Trinity that the
Father is no greater than the Son in the Godhead, nor is
the Son greater than the Holy Ghost, nor is one of them
less than the whole Trinity. No one of them is greater . . .
'
1
The Saxon word is the same which is translated '
begotten in reference to
the Son.
Testimonies. 31
i.]
than the other, nor one less than other, nor one before
other, nor one after other.'
'
Tanta quidem similitude est
in sacro-sancta Trinitate, ita ut Pater maior Filio in
divinitate minime sit, nee Spiritu Sancto maior,

Filius
neque horum aliquis unus tota ipsa Trinitate minor existat.

. Nullus horum maior est altero, neque ullus minor
. .
altero, nee ullus altero prior, nullusque altero posterior.'

Compare verse 24.
The close resemblance of the terminology in these pas-
sages between the Homily and the Creed shows that the
author of the former must have been perfectly familiar
with the latter.
The date, when the composition of these Anglo-Saxon
Homilies or Sermons was completed, is determined within
a very few years by the fact of their being dedicated, so
to speak, to Archbishop Sigeric, sometimes called Siric,
who was Archbishop of Canterbury from 990 to 994.
Their author has been frequently identified with yElfric,
Archbishop of Canterbury from 994 to 1006, upon no
other ground apparently than that they both share in the
same name. Thorpe identifies him with Êlfric, Archbishop
of York from 1023 to 1051, first
apparently because he con-
siders that the name points him out as one or other of these
prelates, and then because, to quote his editorial Preface :
'
From the words of his own Preface, where he,' i. e. Êlfric,
'
speaks of King Ethelred's days as past, and informs us

that in those days he was
only a monk and it mass-priest,
follows that he was not
Archbishop of Canterbury,
Êlfric,
who died in the year 1006, ten years before the death of
King Ethelred.' But in the first place, Êlfric being a
common name at the period when
the homilist lived, the
mere fact of his
being so called does not prove him to "be
either of the prelates above-mentioned. And then it is
not compatible with the particulars which he tells us
respecting himself to suppose that he was either of them.

For we learn, as has been already said, from the dedication
of his Homilies, contained in the Latin Preface to Arch-
bishop Sigeric, that they must have been completed and

published between the years 990 and 994 and further, he ;
there speaks of himself as a pupil of Êthelwold, Bishop of

Winchester, who died in 984. Now as Êlfric, Archbishop
of York, died in the year 1051, supposing him to have died
at the age of seventy, we are forced to the conclusion, if
-
the homilist is identified with him, that he was not more

than thirteen years of age when his Homilies were com-
pleted, a work displaying considerable learning, being
translated, as he says, and drawn in substance from Holy
Scripture and the Fathers, particularly Augustine, Jerome,

Bede, Gregory, Smaragdus, and Haymo a work too which
must have cost much time and labour in the execution ;
and, moreover, upon we must conclude that

this hypothesis
he was not more than three years old when he was under
the instruction and tuition of Bishop Êthelwold Nor !
could he have been the same person as Êlfric, the Arch-
bishop of Canterbury. Had he been so, in the Preface to his
Homilies, which were issued, as we have seen, during the
archiepiscopate of Sigeric and dedicated to him, he would

scarcely have described himself as
'
yElfric, monk and mass-
priest,' he must have written himself '
bishop.' For the

Êlfric, who succeeded Sigeric afterwards in the primacy,
succeeded him also in the bishopric of Ramsbury in Wilt-
shire, which the latter vacated on his promotion to Can-
terbury. It is clear that Thorpe misunderstood the passage

of Jilfric's Preface which seemed to him to imply that the
Homilies were written after the death of Ethelred. Such an
interpretation is not only unnecessary but inadmissible, the
i.]
Testimonies. 33
contrary being certain from the fact of the completion of

the Homilies during Sigeric's archiepiscopate, which ended
twenty-two years before the death of Ethelred. ./Elfric
does not speak of Ethelred 's days as past, but of an event

in his own life as occurring in that king's reign. He was '
' '
sent are his words, according to Thorpe's version, in King
'
Ethelred's day from Bishop Êlfeah/ or Êlpheage, yEthel-
wold's successor, to a minster called Cernel at the prayer
of Êthelmane the thane.' As the authorship of these
Anglo-Saxon Homilies is a question of some interest and
importance in regard to their date, I will conclude by
quoting Lingard's opinion upon the subject.
final He had
been disposed to accept the common belief of their being
the work of Êlfric, the Archbishop of Canterbury, but he
adds :
'
A more minute and patient inquiry has convinced
me that there exists no sufficient reason to believe that
-Êlfric the translator was ever raised to the episcopal
bench, much less to either of the
archiepiscopal thrones V
In the year 1872, Dr. Reeves, at that time Dean
23.
of Armagh, afterwards
Bishop of Down, Connor and
Dromore, drew attention to an Irish MS., containing
inter alia the Athanasian Creed accompanied by a short
preface, which is written partly in Irish and in partly Latin,
and possesses a special interest as
recording a tradition
that the Creed was
composed at the Council of Nice
by three bishops, Eusebius, Dionysius, and another, whose
name was unknown to the writer. The is following
Dr. Reeves's version of this curious document :
The Synod of Nice that made the Faith Catholic

'
and three bishops of;
them only that made it, i.e. Ensebius and

Dionissius, et nomen tertii nescimus
But it ls said that it is the whole
Synod that made it, for it was it which
published it. In Necea vero urbe it was made. And in Bethinia is that city
i. e. a territory in Little Asia. Now to expel the error of Arius it was made ;
1
Lingard, Anglo-Saxon CJmrch, vol. i.
p. 453.
D
for itwas his belief that the Pater is greater quam Filius, and that the Filius is
greater qnam Spiritus Sanctus. The Synod was therefore assembled by
Constantine at Nicea, namely three hundred and eighteen bishops and they ;
were not able to overcome him (Arius) because of his eloquence, until God
overcame him. Exiens enim de coitu (coetu) tit pnrgaret ventrem suum, ei
contigit ut omnia viscera cum stercore foras exirent, ut Judae atque Agitofel
'.'
contigit
The learned Irish scholar who has called our attention to

the above-mentioned MS. states his opinion, formed after
written uniformly in a hand which

'
inspection, that it is
is not later than the year uoo.' Archbishop Ussher, who

'
saw and examined it, speaks of it as codex vetustissimus '
in his addressed to Voss prefixed to his treatise

letter
on the Creeds. It embodies a collection of Hymns written

partly in the Irish language and partly in Latin, and it
possesses a varied history, for in the early part of the
seventeenth century it belonged to the Franciscan Convent
of Donegal. In the year 1647 it was at Louvain. From
thence it was transferred with
Colgan's Irish collections to
the Irish Franciscan Convent of St. Isidore at Rome and ;
there it remained till 1872, when

the whole manuscript
library of that house was removed to Ireland and deposited

in the Church of the Franciscans on Merchant's Quay in
Dublin.
Waterland deems it certain that Eusebius of Vercellae
isthe Eusebius of the legend recorded in this preface to the
Qidcimque. Ussher rightly considers the point not so clear.

Still there are some traces of a kindred legend, connecting
Eusebius of Vercellae either with the composition or the
translation of the Creed. According to Bona, in a manuscript
history of Piedmont preserved in the library at Turin, he

was represented as assisting Athanasius either in drawing
it up or else in rendering it from Greek into Latin.
1
See Appendix by the Rev. William Reeves to a Sermon on the Athanasian
Creed, preached on Sunday, May 12, 1872, by William Lee, D.D., Dublin, 1872.
Testimonies. . 35
i.]
of his Apology, says

Bishop Jewell, in the second part
that he was believed some to be the author but he
by ;
this without specifying who they were who thus

says
ascribed the authorship. Voss in his treatise De tribus
\
Symbolis simply accepts Jewell's assertion
It only remains to add that there can be no doubt as to
what is meant by the Faith Catholic described as being
made by three bishops at the Council of Nice, inasmuch
as the document giving this description is immediately
followed by the Athanasian Creed entitled Fides Catholica.
24. At the commencement of the twelfth century

Honorius of Autun, a priest and scholastic divine of
considerable repute who flourished from about 1090 to

1 1 20, in his work Gemma animae, under the head of the
Faith enumerates four Creeds, as then received by the
'
Catholic Church,, the fourth being the Quicunque. First,'
he says, the Apostles' Creed, to wit, / believe

c
in God, it,'
i.e. Church, 'lays down as its foundation,
the Catholic
singing every day at the commencement of the day and

it
at the commencement of the hours, namely, at Prime by ;
this completes its works, reciting it at Compline. Next,

it
the Faith / believe in God the Father, which is read in
Synods, and which the Nicene Synod issued. Thirdly, the

Faith I believe in One, which was published by the Council
of Constantinople, it chants in the
congregation at Mass.
Fourthly, the Faith Whosoever will, which Athanasius,
Bishop of Alexandria, issued at the request of the Emperor
Theodosius, it
repeats daily at Prime.' The historical
1 '
In hoc Symbolo,' i. e. Athanasian
o, componendo sive e Graeco in Latinum
'
traducendo adiutorem fnisse Athanasio Eusebium Vercellensem

Episcopum
refert Gulielmus Baldesanus in historia Pedcmontana, quae manuscripta
Taurini asservatur in Bibliotheca Duels Sabaudiae ex tabulario Vercellensis
Ecclesiae. Imo solum Eusebium eius auctorem agnoscunt aliqui, ut testatur
Vossius.' Bona, De Divina Psalmodia, cap. xvi. 18.
D 2
error in regard to Theodosius cannot affect the credibility

of this testimony to the use and reception of the Athanasian
Creed at the beginning of the twelfth century. And
elsewhere Honorius thus expresses his sense of its value :
By means of the Quicunqite vult we declare our faith, in

'
which we sum up all besides, and through which we believe

ourselves to be associated with the angels V
25. The teaching of the famous Abelard attracted great

attention in the first half of the twelfth century and the ;
estimation in which the Athanasian Creed was then held
may be amply illustrated from his history. He repeatedly

quotes works Introductio ad theologiam and Sic
it in his
'
'
et 11011, describing it as Symbolum ficlei and attributing
it to Athanasius. And when he was arraigned in 1120
before a Council at Soissons on a charge of heterodoxy,
he was required to make a public recital of it in his
2
vindication .
And when
accused by St. Bernard of having sanctioned
an innovation in ritual, he retorts by enumerating a variety
of innovations in the celebration of divine service charge-
able upon the Order to which St. Bernard belonged, i.e.
1
Fidem catholicam quatuor temporibus editam, immo corroboratam,
'
Ecclesia Catholica recipit, et in quatuor mundi climatibus custodit. Primo

Symbolum Apostolorum, scilicet Credo in Deum, fundamentum sibi ponit, dum
hoc quotidiein principio diei et in principio horarum, scilicet ad Primam,
canit per hoc opera sua consummat, dum hoc ad Completorium recitat.
;
Deinde fidem Credo in Deum Patrem, quae in synodis legitur, qnamque

Nicaena synodus edidit. Tertio fidem Credo in Unum in conventu populi
ad Missam modulatur, quae per Constantinopolitanum concilium propalatur.
Quarto fidem Qtticunque vult quotidie ad Primam iterat, quam Athanasius,
Alexandrinus episcopus, rogatu Theodosii imperatoris edidit.' Honorii, Gemma
Animae, lib. ii.
cap. 59, De fide quatuor temporibus edita, Migne, Patrol.
Latina, torn, clxxii. p. 634. Also 'Per Quicunque milt fidem nostram depro-
mimns, in qua reliqua omnia concludimus, et per quam angelis associari
credimus.' Ibid. lib. ii. cap. 58, De Prima dominicis diebus.
2
Abaelardi Opera, Epist. i. seu Historia calamitatum, Migne, Patrol.
Latina, torn, clxxviii. pp. 145, 146.
Testimonies. 37
i.]
that they had decreed

'
the Cistercians, one of them being

that the Creed of Athanasius was to be recited on Sundays
1
explained by, so it confirms the
only .' This, as it is
testimonies of Udalric and Honorius in regard to

the daily
recital of the Creed being customary at the time when

they wrote.
notices
Bishop of Freisingen, in his Chronicle
26. Otto,
the tradition, but not as being generally received or
credited, that Athanasius put forth the Creed during

his
residence at Treves
2
. Otto's chronicle was commenced in
1143 and finished in 147. died in 1158. 1 He

27. In the Chronicle of Arnold,
Abbot of Liibeck, who
died in 1213 or the commencement of the following year,
an account given of a journey made by Henry, Duke of

is
Saxony and Bavaria, in the year 1172 for the purpose of

visiting the Holy Sepulchre. The
duke made a short stay
at Constantinople en route and whilst he was there \
a discussion took place between the ecclesiastics, who

formed part of his and some Greek theologians onsuite,
the subject of the Procession. The Greeks at first turned
a deaf ear to the arguments of their opponents but at ;
last Henry, Abbot of Brunswick, who is described as a man

of the greatest learning and eloquence, convinced them
of the truth of the Western doctrine, first by adducing
proofs from holy Scripture, and then by quotations from

their own doctors. The first quotation is the twenty-
second verse of the Quicunqne, which he cites as the words
of Athanasius in Symbolo Fidei V The duke is described
'
1
Abaelardi Opera, Epist. x.
2 '
manens in ecclesia Treverorum sub Maximino
Ibidem,' i. e. Athanasius,
'
eiusdem ecclesiae sacerdote Quicunque vult a

quibusdam dicitur edidisse.'
Ottonis Frisingensis Chronicon, cap. 7, apud Pertz, Monumenta
lib. iv.
Germaniae Historica, torn. xx. p. 399. Hanover, 1868.

3 '
Vestri doctores . . .
professi sunt Spiritum Sanctum pvocedere a Filio,
as starting upon his journey from Brunswick. It was

possibly this which occasioned Waterland's mistake in
calling him the Duke of Brunswick, not of Saxony and

Bavaria.
28. The appendix to the dogmatic works of Hugh of
St.Victor contains a treatise upon Ceremonies, Sacraments,
Ecclesiastical Offices and Observances, ascribed to Robert
Paululus, Presbyter of Amiens, who flourished in the latter

half of the twelfth century. Speaking in reference to the
services at the Hours, the writer says that the devotion of

the faithful had added to the three Psalms sung at Prime
the Quicunque vult, in order that at no hour we may be
'
forgetful of the Articles of the Faith which are necessary

to salvation V
29. John Beleth, rector of the theological school at
Paris, in his Rationale reckons, like Honorius of Autun,

'
four Creeds the least, that which is said by all in com-
mon in daily prayer and which the Apostles jointly
composed ;
the second is that which is recited at Prime,
WJiosoever will be saved., which was composed by Athana-
sius the Patriarch of Alexandria in opposition to the
Arian heretics, notwithstanding the false opinion of very

many that Anastasius was the author ;
the third is that
which the Council of Constantinople issued, to wit, that
sicut a Patre. Uncle Athanasius in Symbolo Fidei Spiritits Sanctus a Patre :
et Filio, non factiis nee creatus, nee genitits, sed procedens? Arnoldi Clironica
Slavorum, lib. i.
cap. 5, apud Pertz, Monumenta Germaniae Historica,
torn. xxi. p. 120.
1 '
Isti tres Psalmi obseqnium nostrum Domino praesentant per tres horas,
Primam scilicet, Secundam et Tertiam, ut in his tribus Domino custocliamur . . .
His addidit fidelium devotio :

Qnicnnquc vult salvus esse, ut articulorum fidei,
qui sunt necessarii ad salutem, nulla diei hora obliviscamur.' Appendix ad
Hugonis opera dogmatica, De
Caerejnoniis, Sacramentis, Officio, et Observa-
tionibus Ecclesiasticis, auctore ut videtur Roberto Patilulo, lib. ii, De officiis
ecclesiasticis, cap. i, De hora Prima, apud Migne, Patrol. Latina, torn, clxxvii.
p. 408.
i.]
Testimonies. 39
which up to the present time has been usually sung at

Mass the fourth is that which was put forth by the Nicene
;
Council, . . . and ought to be read in every synod either

wholly or at least in part work is assigned to V Beleth's
some date between the years 1183 and 1190. There is
a doubt respecting his nationality, whether he was an
Englishman or Frenchman.
30. In the thirteenth, as in previous centuries, the Atha-
nasian Creed necessarily comes into notice in connexion
with the controversy between Eastern and Western Chris-
tendom. Four legates, two selected from the Dominican
Order and two from the Franciscan, were sent in the year
1233 by Pope Gregory IX to the Patriarch of Constanti-
nople for the purpose of effecting, if possible, the restoration
of unity and they met the representatives of the Eastern
;
Church conference at a synod, assembled first at Les-

in
chara, afterwards transferred to Nymphaea in Bithynia.

In their letter to the Pope, describing the result of their
mission, they quote the twentieth and two following verses

of the Creed, and speak of it as 'the exposition of the
Faith which the holy Athanasius composed in Latin during
his exile in the West V
1 '
Notandum est quatuor esse symbola minimum quod a cunctis com-
;
muniter in quoticliana oratione dicitur et

quod Apostoli simul composuerunt :
secundum est, quod in prima recitatiir, Qiiicunque milt salmis esse, quod ab
Athanasio Patriarcha Alexandrine contra Arianos hereticos
compositum est,
licetplerique eum Anastasium fuisse falso arbitrentur tertium est, :
quod
Constantinopolitana synodus edidit, videlicet, quod in Missa hactenus cani
consuetum est quartum est, quod ex Niceno concilio prodiit
:
ac legi . . .
oportet in omni synodo vel totuin vel saltern eius aliqua particula
'
Beleth,
Itationale divinorum ojftcionim,
cap. xl, Quid symbolum, quando canendum,
et quot sint numero ?
Apud Migne, Patrol. Latina, torn. ccii. p. 49.
'
Ideo qui credit, quod Spiritus Sanctus non
procedit a Filio, in via perditionis
est. Uncle sanctus Athanasius, cum in
partibus occidentalibus exularet, in
editione fidei, quam Latinis verbis expressit, sic ait Paler a nnllo
: . . . sed pro-
cedens: CJiarta
Afocriswrum D. lâpae, apud Concilia. Labbe et Cossart,
torn, xxiii.
p. 299. Vcnetiis, 1779.
31. Ample notice of the Athanasian Creed is found in

the writings of the doctors of the two great orders of
friars which the thirteenth century gave birth to. Alex-
ander de Hales Hales in Gloucestershire an Englishman
and Franciscan, celebrated as the irrefragable doctor, who
spent the best of his years in teaching theology at Paris,
and died there in 1245, treats f it fully in his Summa Theo-
by him and
'
logiae. It is entitled Symbolum Athanasii,'

'
Symbolum fidei,' and classed as the third of the Creeds ;
for it must be observed that the divines of this century,
unlike Honorius and Beleth in the preceding one, reckoned
only three Creeds, confounding the Nicene proper and

the Constantinopolitan, and applying to the latter the title
of the former a classification which has been continued
ever since.
'
The first Creed/ he says, '
which is said
silently, drawn up according to tradition by the Apostles

themselves ; sung at Mass, / believe in
the Creed which is
one God, which was drawn up by the Fathers at the

Council of Nice, and the Creed of Athanasius which is
sung at Prime.' In reference to the cause of the multi-
'
plication of Creeds or Symbols, he states that the ex-
planation of the Faith in relation to doubtful questions

which had emerged was the cause of the composition of
the Creed of the holy Fathers, which is sung at Mass.
But the exclusion of error, rendered necessary by the
growth of manifold heresies, was the cause of the Creed
of Athanasius, which sung at Prime.' The reasons he
is
gives for the Quicunque being sung at Prime are notable.

'
They are twofold :
namely, for the sacred meaning, to
signify that faith is the first illumination of the mind and
the first of virtues ;
and for utility, for we are armed by
the Symbol of the faith according to what is said in Ephes. vi,
In all tilings taking tlie shield of faith. Therefore at the
i.]
Testimonies. 41
first hour we take the armour of God, that we may be

able to vanquish all the invisible temptations of the
enemy V
32. Thomas Aquinas, the angelical doctor, the greatest
of the Schoolmen, who lived a little later in this century
than Alexander he died in 1274 at the age of fifty also

reckons only three Creeds, and the Athanasian as one of
them, and he entitles it Symbolum,' Symbolum fidei,' and
' '
'
Manifestatio fidei,' and regards it as the work of Athana-
sius. He treats of the question whether it pertains to the
chief pontiff to sanction a Symbol of the Faith and some

;
of the premisses, which he adduces in solving this question

in the affirmative, are no less applicable for the defence of
the Creeds, and in particular the Qtiicunque, in the nine-

teenth century than they were in the thirteenth, and are
such as may be used in argument by Anglo-Catholics no
less than Roman Catholics. The same objections, which
are urged in the present age to the use of the Creeds, seem
to have been urged in the days of Aquinas and the School-
men. Thus he says that '
in the teaching of Christ and the
Apostles the verity of the Faith is sufficiently explained ;
but because men of perverse minds pervert the apostolic

and other teaching and the Scriptures to their own de-
1
'Primurn Symbolum dicitur in silentio, ab ipsis Apostolis conslitutum,
sicut tradunt ;
Symbolum quod cantatur in Missa Credo in umim Deum
quod fuit a Patribus in Nicaeno concilio constitutum et Athanasii'
; Symbolum
in Laud MS. Mis.
493, Anastasii 'quod cantatur in Prima.' Also Fidei '
explanatio circa dubitationes emergentes fuit causa compositionis Symboli

sanctorum Patrum, quod cantatur in Missa. Enoris vero exclusio
propter
haereses pullulantes causa fuit Symboli Athanasii' Laud MS. Mis. 493,
Anastasii ' quod cantatur in Prima.' And 'Dicendum
quod propter duo,
scilicet
propter signincationem ut designetur quod fides est prima illuminatio
mentis et prima virtutnm, et propter utilitatern armamur enim :
fidei, Symbolo
secunclum quod dicitur ad Ephes. vi. In omnibus sumentes scutum fidei.
:
Propterea in hora prima arma Dei sumimus, \\i omnes tentationes invisibilcs
inimicorum expugnare valeamus.' Alexander de Hales, Summa Theologiae,
Pars iii, Quaestio Ixix, De ratione
Symboli.
struction, on that account the more explicit declaration of

the Faith became necessary in process of time in order to
combat the errors which arose.' In reference to the Canon
of Ephesus forbidding any one to produce or compose any
other Creed than the Nicene, that is, clearly, the original
'
Nicene Creed, he asserts that this prohibition applies
only to private persons to whom it does not belong to
determine matters of faith.' It will be recollected that
this canon was confidently alleged in the recent con-
troversy respecting the Athanasian Creed as furnishing an
irresistible argument against acceptance and use. And
its
'
'
lastly, he states that '

Athanasius composed it not in the
form of a Symbol, but of a doctrinal exposition,' and that
contains in brief the whole truth of the Faith V
'
it
Towards the conclusion of the same century Johannes

33.
Januensis, or Genuensis rather i. e. of Genua or Genoa
sometimes called Balbus, sometimes de Balbis, who was
a professor of the same Order as Thomas Aquinas, viz.
the Preachers or Dominicans, issued his Catholicon a
universal vocabulary. This work was printed repeatedly
even in the fifteenth century, a proof of the great esteem
in was then held, as also we may presume in the
which it
'
century preceding and under the head of Symbolum

'
it treats of the Creeds. Genuensis follows Hales and

Aquinas in reckoning three Creeds or Symbols the Atha-
'
1
Dicendum est . .
quod in doctrina Christ! et Apostolorum veritas fidei
.
est sufficienter explicata. Sed quia perversi homines Apostolicam doctrinam et

caeteras doctrinas et Scripturas pervertunt ad sui ipsorum perditionem ideo . . .
necessaria fuit teinporibns procedentibus explicatio fidei contra insnrgentes

'
errore*.' Also ' Prohibitio et sententia Synodi i. e. of
Ephesus se extendit
'
ad privatas personas, quarnm non est determinare de fide.' And ' Athanasius
non composuit manifestationem fidei per modum Symboli, sed magis per
modum cniusdam doctrinae.' And ' Integram fidei veritatem eius doctrina
breviter continebat.' D. Thomae Aquinatis, Sttmma Theologiae, Secunda
secnndae. Quaest. i, De Fide Art. x.
Testimonies. 43
i.]
nasian as the third. He states, as the reason why the
said in silence at Prime and Compline,

Apostles' Creed was
whereas the two others were recited aloud, one after
'
the Gospel and the second at Prime, that the Apostles'

Creed was issued when the Faith was not yet spread abroad,
and on that account is said secretly and also that it was
;
issued with the object of propounding the doctrine of the

at
Faith, and on that account is said daily at Matins,
Prime and Compline, as if at the beginning of the day
and the night, to signify that all our work should take its
beginning from faith, and that by it we
are protected
against the dangers of adversity and prosperity.

But the
other Creeds were issued when the Faith was already
spread abroad, and therefore are sung openly. And because
they were issued, not for the purpose of propounding the
Faith but of defending and elucidating it, therefore they
are not said every day, but on days when people are
now
accustomed to resort in the largest numbers to church, and
which are marked by some special solemnity in reference
to matters concerning the articles of the Faith. And because
the Nicene Creed was issued for the declaration of the
Faith, it is said immediately after the Gospel, as it were its
exposition. But the Creed of Athanasius, which was issued

for the refutation of heretics, is said at Prime, as it were
just after the darkness of heresy has been driven away.'
Then he adds that it
might be objected that 'this Creed
is
proposed as a rule of Faith requiring assent but, as ;
Augustine in his epistle to Jerome says To Apostles and

:
Prophets solely is this honour due, that whatever they said

those very things are to be believed as true, therefore after
the Apostles' Creed other Creeds ought not to have been
made.' To this he replies, ' that the Fathers, who issued
other Creeds after the Apostles, added
nothing of their
own, but gathered those things which they added from the
holy Scriptures and because some things are difficult in
;
that Creed of the Apostles, on that account, in order to
explain it, the Nicene Creed was issued, which treats more
fully of the Faith as regards certain articles : and because
some things were contained implicitly in those Creeds,
which on account of the heresies which arose required to
be explicitly enunciated, to that end the Creed of Atha-
nasius, the special antagonist of heretics, was issued V
These passages from Alexander Hales and Thomas Aquinas
1 '
Scias quod tria sunt Symbola, Symbolum Apostolorum quod dicitur in
Matutinis, in Prima, et in Completorio, item Nicenum, quod dicitur in

Dominicis diebus post Evangelium, item Athanasii, quod dicitur in Prima
Dominicis diebus alta voce. Et, si quaeras quare Symbolum Apostolorum
dicatur submisse in Prima et in Completorio ;
alia vero duo dicantur alte,
unum post Evangelium, alterum sicut :
Qiiicimque vult salvus esse in Prima,
respondeo :
Symbolum Apostolorum fuit editum, quando bides non erat
propalata, et ideo in secreto dicitur; et quod editum fuit ad proponendam
Fidei cloctrinam, ideo quotidie dicitur in Matutinis et in Prima et in Comple-
torio, quasi in principio diei et noctis in signum, quod omnis nostra operatic a
fide debet accipere initium, et quia per ipsam contra adversa et in prosperis
protegimur. Alia autem Symbola edita fuerunt tempore Fidei propalatae, et

ideo publice cantantur. Et quia non ad proponendum (sic) Fidem sed ad
defendendum vel ad elucidandum edita fuernnt, ideo mine non in singulis diebus
dicuntur, sed in illis, in quibus homines maxime ad ecclesiam venire con-

sueverunt, et in quibus fit aliqua sollemnizatio de his quae ad articulos Fidei
pertinent. Et quia Symbolum Nicennm editum est ad manifestationem Fidei,
dicitur statim post Evangelium quasi expositio ipsius. Symbolum autem
Athanasii, quod contra hereticos editnm est, inPrima dicitur, quasi iam pulsis
hereticorum tenebris. Sed potest queri : hoc Symbolum proponitur ut regula
Fidei cuius actus est assentire ; sed, sicut Aug. in ep. ad Hiero. Solis Apostolis
:
et Prophetis est hie honor exhibendus, ut quaecttngtte dixentnt hacc ipsa vera
esse credantur, ergo post Symbolum Apostolorum. non debuerunt fieri alia
Symbola. Ad hoc dico, quod Pat res qui alia Symbola post Apostolos edi-
dernnt, nihil de suo apposuerunt, sed ex sacris Scripturis ea quae addiderunt

excerpserunt et quia quaedam difficilia sunt in illo Symbolo Apostolorum,
:
ideo ad eius explanationem editum est Symbolum Nicenum, quod diffusius

Fidem quoad aliqnos articulos prosequitur et quia quaedam implicite contine-:
bantur in Symbolis, quae oportebat propter insurgentes hereses explicari,

illis
ad id editum est Symbolum Athanasii, qui specialiter contra hereticos se

opposuit.' Catholicon sen universale vocabulariiun Johannis Genuensis.
Lugduni, 1514. Sub voce '
Symbolum.'
i.]
Testimonies. 45
and Johannes Genuensis are important as showing that in

the age of the Schoolmen, and we may say in the Western
Church of the Middle Ages, the Qtdcunque was received as
a Creed and recited in the offices of worship together with
the Apostles' and Nicene Creeds, and also as showing the
relative value in the estimation of those divines who spent
their lives in the study of theology, of holy Scripture, and
the Creeds ;
the former being deemed by them sufficient
as containing all things needful to be believed, the latter
necessary, not as adding to God's word, but explaining,

defending, elucidating its true meaning, the exponents and
safeguards of revealed truth. The Schoolmen and our own
articles are here at one.
34. William Durandus, or Durantus, the author of the

famous Rationale^ was a contemporary of Genuensis. He
was a Frenchman by birth, and appointed Bishop of Mende
in the south of France in 1 2 85, but during the greater part
of his he was employed in Italy in
life offices of trust and
responsibility under successive Popes. He died at Rome
in 1296",and was present as Legate at the Council of Lyons
in 1274. Durand, in common with the divines of the
thirteenth century, reckons only three Creeds, but with
Beleth he places the Athanasian Creed second in order,
though he adds that possibly it may be described as the

third, inasmuch as the Nicene was drawn up prior to it at
the first Nicene Council. He speaks of the Qiiicimqiie as
the work of Athanasius, composed at Treves 1
.
1
'Nota quod triplex est Symbolnm Primum est Symbolum Apostolorum.
:
Secundum est Quicunque -vult salmis esse &c., ab Athanasio Patriarcha Alex-
andrine in Trevirensi civitate compositura.Hoc tamen potest dici tertium, nam
Nicenum, de quo sequitur, fuit prius in prima Nicena synodo compilatum.
Tertium est Nicenum, scilicet Credo in unum
Deum, quod Damasus Papa ex
condicto universalis Synodi apud
Constantinopolin celebratae instituit in Missa
cautari patenter,
quanquam et Marcus Papa statnisset illud alta voce et
cantari,
46 Documentary Evidence.
35. In the fourteenth century Ludolphus Saxo, a school-

man and monk of the Carthusian monastery at Strasburg, in
his Life of Christ, reckons three Creeds, the Athanasian as
the third. The ends for which they were made he states
to be severally instruction in the Faith, its explanation,
and its defence 1 According to Sixtus Senensis, Ludolph
.
had belonged for thirty years to the Dominican Order

before his reception into the Carthusian monastery at
Strasburg, but on this point there is some difference,

another authority Philip Bergomas speaking of him as
an Augustinian Eremite. He flourished about the year
1330 : his work was very popular, as appears from its
passing through several printed editions in the fifteenth
century and being translated into various modern lan-

guages.
It is needless to adduce any further evidence under the
head of Testimonies.
vocatnr Symbblum mnius.' Durandi Rationale, lib. iv. cap. 25 De Symbolo,

p. 207, edit. Neapoli 1859.
Symbola. Primum Apostolorum secundum Niceni Concilii
1 '
Sunt tria ; ;
tertium Athanasii. Primtim factum est ad Fidei instructionem secundum ad ;
Fidei explanationem tertium ad Fidei defensionem.' Ludolpus Saxo,/?*? vita

;
Christi, secunda pars, cap. 83, edit. Ven. 1581, p. 730.

CHAPTER II.
CANONS AND ECCLESIASTICAL INJUNCTIONS.
i. THE earliest document, applicable to our subject

'
Epistola Canonica
'
under this category, is entitled ;
apparently so to speak an episcopal charge, containing

a series of canons or capitula with reference to the duties
of the clergy, and authoritatively declaring quae debeant
'
adimplere presbyteri, diaconi sen subdiaconi.' The first

of
these canons or capitula was adduced by the brothers

Ballerini, the editors of the works of St. Leo, A.D. i753~57>
in proof of the antiquity of the Athanasian Creed.
It is as follows :
'
Primum omnium Fidem Catholicam
omnes Presbyteri, Diaconi, seu Subdiaconi memoriter
teneant, et si quis hoc faciendum praetermittat, xl diebus
a vino abstineat ;
et si post abstinentiam neglexerit com-
mendandum, replicetur in eo sententia.' These learned
canonists think it certain that the Quicunqtie is described
here under the term '
Fides Catholica ;' firstly, because that
was secondly, because it is so termed in the
its earliest title ;
heading of Fortunatus's commentary and thirdly, because ;
neither the Apostles' Creed nor the Nicene could be

intended not the former, which would have been more
' '
fitly called Fides Apostolica and was required to be learnt
by heart not by the clergy only but by the laity as well ;
not the latter, which was usually designated

'
Fides
Nicaena V They maintain that the Epistola Canonica must

have been issued in the early part of the sixth century,
inasmuch as it is found in a collection of canons of that
epoch, also that it is an Italian document, as is shown by

the fact of its appearing in three different collections, all
Italian : and it may be added that in all probability it was

drawn up for some diocese in the north of Italy, the
original home of several of the MSS. in which it is
preserved. We have some external evidence of the
antiquity and authenticity of this document. Thus the

first capitulum or canon quoted above is incorporated
into the Capitulare drawn up by Atto, Bishop of Vercellae,
in middle of the tenth century, A.D. 945 to 960.
the
Atto, who is described by D'Achery as a most learned
theologian and canonist, had met with the Epistola
Canonica in a MS. belonging to his cathedral library,
and having found it to be of the greatest use wrote to
a priest of Milan, by name Ambrose, to make inquiry
2
respecting age andits
authorship But the latter was .
unable to give the desired information and the fact that in ;
the tenth century the date when it was drawn up was

unknown men
of learning, shows that at that time
to
it could not have been a recent production. Similarly the
ninth capitulum, forbidding the alienation by the clergy
of church estates, forms the forty-second chapter, bearing
the title De bonis ecclesiasticis. Ex epistola canonica, in the
second appendix to the Collection of Regino. Abbot of
1
See Migne, Patrol. Latina, torn. Ivi. p. 890. Also Editorum obscrvationes
in F. Quesnelhi dissertationem, 1 1 1 ,
De
auctore Symboli Quicttnqtie, quod
S. Athanasii nomine inscribitur, printed in the De vctustis Canonum Collec-
tionibus dissertatiomim Sylloge, edited by Gallandins, torn. i. pp. 842-7.
Magontiaci, 1790. Also Baluzii Capitularia, torn. ii.
p. 1374, note. Paris,
1780.
2
Migne, Patrol. Latina, torn. Ivi. p. 862. Also Spicilegiztm Dacheriamim,
torn. i.
p. 439. Paris, 1723.
ii.]
Canons and Ecclesiastical Injunctions. 49
Prum in the Diocese of Treves. This collection was

compiled A.D. 906 ; the two appendices were, in the opinion
of Baluze, ancient additions, though not the work of Regino.
Both the collection and appendices were drawn from
1
earlier sources .
And
the Epistola Canonica bears internal evidence of
authenticity: its contents are such as we should expect to

find in a document of the
and epoch to which it is
class
assigned. The first capitulum has been already produced ;
another censures presbyters, who admit to Communion
persons who have

contracted incestuous marriages some
marriages of near affinity being specified another enacts ;
a penalty to be inflicted upon presbyters who should
persistently receive to Communion persons guilty of
partaking in certain pagan superstitions and idol worship

a proof of the common prevalence of paganism at the time
in the diocese where this
epistle was issued another ;
requires that in every parish where Baptism was celebrated

the presbyter should be assisted by a deacon another, as ;
already mentioned, forbids the alienation or sale of church

estates by the clergy another denounces some married
;
clergy possessed of churches, in which they exercised their

ministry whom it was reported that they had allowed
2
,
of
their wives and daughters to appropriate to their own use
the sacred vestments, and it imposes a severe
penalty for
the offence, if proved. Here is a distinct proof that at
the time parochial clergy,
having charge of and serving
churches, were not unfrequently married men, living with
their wives and families. The last requires all clergy, who
are subject to the bishop, to submit their case to his
1
See Baluze's Preface to Regino's Collection in
Migne, Patrol. Latina,
torn, cxxxii. p. &c.
175,
2 '
Qnidam coniugati habentes tittilos, in quibus deserviunt.'
E
decision, in the event of any difference, and by no means to

resort to a secular tribunal.
'
Epistola Canonica printed by the Ballerini the

'
This is
'
fourth among
'
Documenta iuris canonici veteris in the
1
Appendix to their edition of the works of St. Leo it is also ,
printed by Baluze from the papers of Sirmond, with the

'
title :
Capitula data Presbyteris, Diaconis, et Subdiaconis,'
2
in the Appendix to his edition of the Capitularia It is .
found, as one of the documents comprised in the ante-

Dionysian Collection of Canons already mentioned, in two
Roman MSS., Barber. 3,888 and Vat. 1,342, of which
the Ballerini have given some account in their treatise
De antiquis collectionibus Canonum*. The Barberini MS.
belonged some time for to the monastery of St. Saviour
at the Monte Amiata in Tuscany, and is assigned by
Reifferscheid to the ninth or tenth century ;
the Vatican
MS., described by Montfaucon as elegantissimus et
antiqitissimus and considered by Maassen to have been

executed at the end of the ninth or the beginning of the
following century, is believed to have been one of the books
of the ancient Lateran Library. It is also found, as
a constituent of another Italian Collection called the
Additions of Dionysius, in the following MSS. : Vat. 1,343,
1,353, 5,845, Vallicellan A. 5, and the MS. already

mentioned as being consulted by Bishop Atto in the tenth
century, which is probably still in the Cathedral Library at
Vercelli, for it was there, as stated by the Ballerini, at the
time when they wrote in the last century. Of these MSS.
all but the Vallicellan may be distinctly traced to the
1
Migne, Patrol. Latina, torn. Ivi. p. 890.
2
Baluzii Capitularia, torn. ii.
p. 1374. Paris, 1780.
3
Pars ii.
cap. 7. See Galland's De vetustis Canonum collectionibus
Dissertationum Sylloge, lorn. i.
ii.]
north of Italy, awhich evidently points to the

fact
conclusion that there must be sought the birthplace of the

collection common to them. Vat. 1,343, a MS. of the
tenth century, belonged originally to the church of Pavia,
as appears from the last document, which it contains an
from a bishop of that city respecting a priest
official letter
who had been subject to his jurisdiction to the Archbishop

of Milan. At the commencement too a fragment has been
inserted from another MS., which likewise
preserves
a Pavian church document, a copy as it seems of
viz.
a citation to archpresbyters and clergy of other orders to

attend a Synod at Pavia bringing with them their sacred
vestments and books. This though inserted by the
authorities of the Vatican, as appears by the papal stamp
marked upon it together with the of the MS., must
number
have been so inserted because they considered the codex to
to be a Pavian book. Vat. 1,353 is a copy written in the
year 1441 of an older MS. at Bergamo, and was presented
to Cardinal Peter Barbo, who afterwards succeeded to the
papacy under the title of Paul II. He was pope from

1464 to 1471. Vat. 5,845 is written in Lombardic minus-
cules, which points to the probability that it was executed
either in the north of Italy or at any rate by a North-
'
Italian scribe. Holstenius calls it codex Longobardicus
vetustissimus.' The Ballerini assign it to the time of
Charlemagne, because it contains an account of the conference

between Leo III and the envoys of the Frank Emperor
respecting the insertion of the Filioque in the Creed.
Having inspected the MS. myself, I may add that this is the
latest document which it includes. From a note written
at the bottom of the first
page, we learn that this codex was
in private ownership in the early part of the seventeenth
century. It is as follows 'P. Constanteinus Abbas
:
E 2
Caietanus, T. P. anno Domini 1629, mense Octobris.' The

Vallicellan MS., so called because it is deposited in the
library attached to the church of S. Maria in Vallicella
at Rome, is believed by the Ballerini to have been written
during the pontificate of Nicholas I in the middle of the

ninth century, inasmuch as it gives a of the popes which
list
closes with that pope, his name being written in the

original hand of the manuscript, while the years, months,
and days of his reign are added in a later hand. It bears
a close resemblance as regards its contents to the Vercelli
MS. and to Vat. 1,353, in all three the additions of
Dionysius being preceded by the Hadrian Collection.
^The other codices in which the Epistola Canoriica is
found are a MS. of Monte Casino and a Vatican MS., the

two MSS. in which Sirmond discovered it, as stated by
Baluze in his notes on the Capitularies, though possibly

the latter may be identical with one of the Vatican MSS.
previously mentioned ; also a MS. at Lucca, used by Mansi

in editing the document in the Supplement to the Councils.
These are also Italian MSS., and it may be presumed
comprise the third collection in which, according to the
l
Ballerini, this Epistola is preserved .
must be remembered that Waterland wrote his book

It
drew attention to the

several years before the Ballerini
Epistola Canonica in connexion with the Athanasian

Creed. Hence, no doubt, his silence upon the subject.
2. The next canonical authority in reference to the
Athanasian Creed which being next
calls for attention, as
in pointof antiquity, is the well-known Canon of Autun.

Waterland spoke with hesitation of this canon, not ven-
'
turing to propose it as clear and undoubted evidence but
1
See Admonitio in Collectionem, 4 Migne, Patrol. Latino, torn. Ivi,
pp. 861, 862.

ii.]
probable only
1
. But in his time it was only known
through the single MS. in the
Library of St. Benignus at
Dijon, in which Sirmond discovered it in the early part of
2
the seventeenth century But our knowledge upon the
.
subject has been enlarged by Professor

considerably
Maassen's account in his History of the Sources and Litera-
ture of Western Canon-Law of the two ancient collections,
in which this canon is preserved and its authenticity is;
thus firmly established, so far at any rate as to accredit

its testimony to the use of the Quictmque under Church
authority in one diocese of France at least as early as the

seventh century, and to the fact also of its being esteemed
the work of Athanasius at that period. These two col-
lections of canons Angers and Herovall
are called the
Collections the by Professor Maassen
first being so called
from the place where Sirmond first met with a manuscript
copy of it, the Library of the Cathedral Church of Angers ;
the second receiving its title from the name of a former

owner of the codex, through which it first became gene-
rally known, Antony Vion d'Herouval. They are both
systematic collections, the canons

being arranged not
under the headings of the Councils at which they were
severally enacted, but according to their subject-matter.
The Angers, being the basis of the Herovall Collection,
is
necessarily the older of the two ;
at the same time the
Herovall, while has incorporated the Angers, has drawn
it
its materials from other and independent sources also.

The MSS. of the Angers Collection at present known are,
according to Maassen, six in number: 2. A Cologne MS.,

Darmstadt, 2,179, of the eighth or ninth century, 2. Paris,
Lat., 1603, of the ninth century. 3. Burgund., 10,127-
1
History of Ike Athanasian Creed, chap. ii.
Concilia antiqua Galliae opera Sirmoncli, torn. i.

pp. 506, 507,00!. Paris, 1629.
10,144, a MS. in the Burgundian Library at Brussels, of

the ninth century. 4. Einsiedeln, 205, of the ninth century.
5. Sangall, 675, of the ninth century. 6. Vienna, 2,171,
of the ninth century. Whether the codex in which Sirmond

found this collection is still in existence seems unknown.
The MSS. of the Herovall Collection, according to the
same authority, are as follows: i. Paris, Lat., 3,8486,
of the beginning of the ninth century, 2. Vercelli, 175*
of the ninth century. 3. Paris, Lat., 2,123, of the ninth
century. 4. Paris, Lat., 4,281, of the ninth century: this
appears from the following advertisement written on the

flyleaf to have belonged originally to St. Martial's Abbey
at Limoges, from which it passed to the Royal Library
at Paris, now the Bibliotheque Nationale Hie est liber

:
'
sancti Martialis si quis eum furaverit sit cum datan et
abiram infernum responderunt omnes.

in amen.' 5. A
codex at Ivrea, in Piedmont, of the tenth century. 6.
Paris, Lat., 2,400, of the eleventh century this also origin-
ally belonged to St. Martial's at Limoges. 7. Sangerm.

Lat., 1,363, of the eleventh century this is the MS. which
was owned by Monsieur d'Herouval, from whom it passed
to James Petit, and the latter presented it in 1709 to the
Abbey of St. Germain- des-Pr^s at Paris. It is in all
probability now in the Bibliotheque Nationale, to which

wellnigh all the Sangerman. MSS. were transferred at the
time of the French Revolution. From this MS. Petit
edited a selection of the Herovall Canons as an appendix
to Theodore's Penitentiale it is
printed in vol. xcix of
:
Migne's Patrologia Latina.

I have been the more particular in specifying the dates
of these MSS., inasmuch as they indicate to a certain

extent the antiquity of the collections that neither of
them could have been compiled later than the close of the
ii.]
eighth century. But we may form a nearer approximation

to the several epochs of their composition, and upon surer
grounds. Both Petit and the Ballerini conclude from the

internal evidence of its contents that the Herovall Collec-
tion must have been drawn upprior to the reign of Charle-
magne. On
the other hand, the earliest period possible
for its compilation is determined by the latest document
contained in it, the date of which is certain the anathemas

of Gregory II, and the Roman Synod of 721. Another of
its contents, the decretal In Epistola or responses of
Stephen II, who was pope from 753 to 757> would necessarily
be dated later if its genuineness could be relied upon, but
this is not the case. Thus the Herovall Collection could
not have been compiled later than the year 770 or there-
abouts on the one side, nor earlier than 721 on the other.
It may safely be considered a work of the middle of the
eighth century. And the Angers Collection, being the

earlier of the two, as already stated, must be assigned to
the early part of the same century or the close of the pre-
ceding one. It could not have been compiled earlier, the

latest document included in it being the Autun Canons,
subscribed, as we shall see, by Leodegar
Leger, or St.
Bishop of that city, who

died in the year 678.
The Angers Collection, being the earlier of the two and
the source in a great measure of the other, is necessarily
the most important in reference to the canon enjoining the
recitation of the Athanasian Creed, and requires to be
first considered. In the two earliest MSS. of this collec-
tion, the Cologne MS. of the eighth or ninth century and
the Paris MS., which though assigned by Maassen to the
ninth century generally, belongs indeed to the early part
of it, the first chapter or capitulum has for its subject-title
1
De fide catholica et symbolo,' and it contains two canons,
the being as follows in the Paris codex, from which

first
I have copied it 'Si quis presbyter aut diaconus sub-

:
diaconus clericus symbolum quod sancto inspirante spiritu
apostoli tradidernnt et fidem sancti Athanasi presolis irre-

prehensibiliter non recensiverit ab episcopo condamnetur.'
'
If
any of the clergy, presbyter, or deacon, or sub-deacon,
shall fail to recite correctly the Symbol which the Apostles
delivered by the inspiration of the Holy Ghost, and the

Faith of the holy Athanasius, let him be censured by the
bishop.' This is introduced by the title, written in large

'
rubricated capitals, as follows :
Incipiunt canones Agus-
todininsis hira prima' the word hira in this connexion
obviously meaning number. The other canon is the

'
Agde, which refers to the Traditio Symboli

'
thirteenth of
or instruction of catechumens in the Creed. In the Vienna,
Einsiedeln, and Sangall MSS. this chapter respecting the
Creeds is omitted, and the two canons which it contains
appear with other pieces at the commencement, before the

list of the titles of the chapters. The Brussels MS. varies
from the rest, not only omitting this first chapter with
these MSS., but also that which forms the first
three
chapter in them and the second in the Cologne and Paris

codices and it appears that neither of the above-mentioned
;
canons is to be found in it. The Cologne MS. is described
by Maassen, I may mention, as giving the collection in

its most authentic form. Besides the canon upon the
Creeds in its first chapter, this collection contains in
another chapter the forty-fourth, which is appropriated
to the subject of monastic discipline several other Autun
Canons referring to that topic. They are numbered i, 8,
6, 5, 10, 21, the numbers showing that there must have
been other canons enacted at the same Synod which passed

these and they are expressly attributed to Leodegar, the
;
ii.]
first being thus described in the Paris MS. :

'
Canon
Agustodoninsis hira i
Leudegarii episcopi.' This might
suggest that the canon enjoining the recital of the Apostles'
and Athanasian Creeds, which is simply described as the
first Autun Canons without being attributed to
of the
Leodegar, was drawn up at some other Autun Synod, not

presided over by him nor held during his episcopate. But
at the end of the collection, in a chapter bearing the title
De episcopis qni suprascriptos canones consenserunt et firma-

verunt, a list is added of the different Councils, at which
the comprised in the collection were enacted,
canons
together with the numbers of the bishops present at each
several Council, and the names of many of them. There
are twenty- six paragraphs in all referring to the several
Councils, one paragraph for each Council ;
and the last is
somewhat different in form from the rest it simply records

the consent of Bishop Leodegar, and adds totidem verbis
the very terms of his subscription. It appears thus in the
Paris MS. Consensum domno Leutgario episcopo agus-

:
'
tiduninsis Ego Leutgarius acsi peccator episcopus cum con-

sensu fratrum meorum polliciti sumus et perpetualiter
placuit conservandum.' No other Synod of Autun being
mentioned in the table, the unavoidable conclusion is that
this subscription applies to all the Autun Canons contained
in the collection ;
that referring to the Creeds as well as
the others concerning monastic discipline. are led by We
it to understand that these were the canons authorized
and enacted by St. Leger, as bishop in a Diocesan Synod,

over which he presided. It has been objected that the
canon on the Creeds cannot belong to the same Council

as the canons relating to monastic discipline, because it is
termed the first of the Autun Canons, and one of the latter
set is thus numbered also. But the first of the canons
relating to monastic discipline is expressly described in

the Angers Collection as the first of its class Primus
'
titulus hie est monasticae disciplinae^ which would seem

to imply that in the original Autun Collection it was
preceded by others on different subjects. And this appears
to be the opinion of Sirmond, who refers the canon on
the Faith to the Synod of Leodegar, which enacted these
disciplinary canons.
very observable that the compiler of this collection
It is
gives his notice of the Autun Canons in a peculiar form.

In other instances he simply mentions the particular
Council which enacted the several canons, together with
the names of some or all of the bishops present. In
regard to the Autun Canons not only is Leodegar's name

recorded as the consenting bishop, but also the very terms
in which he gave his consent. This may have been done
partly because thisin peculiar importance and
case a
authority would attach to the presiding bishop's subscrip-

tion, the Council being Diocesan the only Diocesan
Council mentioned in the table and partly it may have
been owing to the weight and veneration with which
Leodegar's memory was invested. But the subscription
thus recorded seems to have a further significance, implying
that the compiler probably had access to the archives of
the Church of Autun, and was himself a member of it. As
the Synod in all probability occurred within his own life-
time and memory, he may have been himself present on

the occasion one of the brethren who declared their placet
in favour of the canons which he has preserved.
Our and genuineness of the canons
belief in the antiquity
under our consideration receives full confirmation from the
Herovall Collection, which, as we have before said, is based
upon the Angers Collection and comprehends its contents

almost entirely. In the first place this collection, like the

Angers according to the two earliest and most reliable
MSS., has for the subject of its first chapter the faith with
the title De fide catholica et simbolo ; and this chapter
contains the Autun Canon concerning the Apostles' and
Athanasian Creeds, clearly drawn from the Angers Collec-
tion with a remarkable abbreviation, as follows :
'
Canon
agustudinensis hira I Si quis presbyter diaconus sub-
diaconus vel clericus simbolum apostolorum et fidem sancti
Athanasi episcopi irreprehensibiliter non recensierit, ab
episcopo condemnetur.' This is absent from none of the
existing MSS., I believe, certainly from none of those at

Paris. Thenchapter respecting monastic discipline
in its
it
reproduces the Autun Canons on the subject, which
appear in the corresponding chapter of the Angers Collec-
tion, with some verbal alterations ;
but what is worthy of
notice is that it omits to ascribe them to Leodegar,
simply describing them as Autun Canons, the last one,
however, being numbered differently 15 instead of zi
probably by a mere clerical error. Then in a later chapter
it gives in an abbreviated form the Angers Table of
Councils, the last paragraph or number consisting merely
of the mention of Leodegar's consent to the canons without
his subscription thus, according to Paris 3,848 B and 2,123 :
'
Consensio et confirmatio Leodegarii episcopi augustu-
dinensis.' Lastly, prefixed to this collection the Herovall
is its own Table of Councils, i.e. a list of the various
Councils at which the canons included in it were passed,
together with the numbers of the bishops present and in
many instances their names. The last number or paragraph
'
in this table is Canones Augustodunensium sancti Leode-
garii episcopi,' which varies in form from the last paragraph
in the
Angers Table, but harmonizes with the other para-
graphs in both tables. What are these Autun Canons of

St. Leger? Clearly all the Autun Canons in the collection,
that in the first chapter relating to the Creeds, as well as
the others in the chapter concerning monastic discipline.

This is the more plain in the present case, because the
monastic canons are not attributed, and that solely, to
Leodegar, as they are in the Angers Collection or at least
in the Paris codex of it. These two Tables of Councils,
appearing side by side almost, as they do in Petit 's edition
of a selection of the Herovall Canons l have occasioned ,
great confusion in the minds of persons unaware of the fact

that they belong to two different, though kindred, collections,
and many groundless objections have arisen in consequence.
To sum up the evidence of these two collections to the
genuineness and antiquity of the canon in question. In
the two earliest and most reliable MSS. of the Angers it is
found in the first chapter which has the faith for its subject,
and is described as the first of the Autun Canons. Other

Autun Canons, referring to monastic discipline, appear in
another chapter, and they are ascribed to Leodegar but this ;
does not forbid our believing the canon in the first chapter
to have been his also, and we are induced to attribute it to
him by the Table of Councils and of bishops who passed
the canons contained in the collection, inasmuch as the
last number gives the name of Leodegar as consenting to
certain canons together with his subscription as Bishop of
Autun, and this subscription must be understood to apply

to all the Canons of Autun in the collection that on the
Creeds as well as the rest no other Council of Autun
being mentioned besides that, the canons of which were
thus subscribed by him. In three other of the MSS. of
this collection it does not appear in the same place, the
3
Migne, Patrol, Latina, tom.xlix. pp. 1075, 1076.
ii.] Canons and Ecclesiastical Injunctions. 61
first chapter concerning the faith being omitted but it is ;
found among some prefatory matter. In this case also the

Table of Councils which is met with in these MSS., as well
as those before mentioned, points to the conclusion, though

not with equal clearness and directness, that the canon was
one of those sanctioned by Bishop Leodegar. Thus there
is but one existing MS. of the Angers Collection which
omits this canon entirely. Of the seven MSS. of the

Herovall Collection none is known to omit it. It appears,
as in the Cologne and Paris MSS. of the Angers Collection,
in the first chapter relating to the faith in the chapter
:
concerning monastic discipline the Autun Canons on that

subject, which are met with in the earlier collection, are
reproduced, but not ascribed, as there, to Leodegar and :
the Table of Councils belonging to this collection in its

last number or paragraph mentions the Canons of Autun,
and that simply as the Canons of St. Leodegar, clearly
implying that all the Autun Canons in the collection were
enacted at the Council over which that bishop presided.
Nothing can be more distinct than the testimony of this

collection to the fact that the canon we are considering
was thus authorized by him. And this, bearing in mind
that the Angers Collection was the principal source from
which the Herovall was drawn, is a cogent reason for
believing that in the judgement of the compiler of the
latter collection this canon was an original element of
the former and not a subsequent addition, and was thus
originally inserted in the primary collection as being one

of Leodegar's Canons. Clearly in the copy of the Angers
Collection which he used, and which he must have deemed
authentic, he found the canon in the
first chapter
relating to
the faith as it
appears the
in Paris and Cologne codices ; and
he evidently understood Leodegar's subscription recorded

in the Angers Collection to apply to this as well as the
other Autun Canons

respecting monastic discipline.. More-
over, had this canon been a subsequent addition, it would
have been placed at the end of the collection, not at the
beginning in the first chapter. The omission of it therefore
from the Brussels MS. has no material significance and ;
the original type of the Angers Collection is to be found in

the Paris and Cologne MSS. rather than in that codex.
Thus we have sufficient grounds for holding this Autun
Canon requiring the recitation of the Athanasian as well as
the Apostles' Creed by the clergy to have been enacted by
a Council presided over by Bishop Leodegar. But whether
it were his or not is a point of no material importance in
regard to the value of itstestimony to the antiquity of the

Quiczmque. For if it was not drawn up at a Synod held
under Leodegar it must have emanated from some other
Autun Synod held prior or subsequently to his episcopate,
but stillthe seventh century. It cannot be put later,
in
the Angers Collection in which it is found having been
compiled, as we have seen, in the early part of the eighth

century at the latest. The date would thus be postponed
some twenty years only, or at the outside thirty.
As
the history of MSS. is always interesting and often
important, I must not omit to add that Paris. Lat., 1,603,

to which I have made frequent reference, for some time
belonged to the Abbey of St. Amand near Tournay,
described by Martene as one of the most illustrious abbeys
of the Low Countries, and even of the Benedictine Order.
This appears from a memorandum on the first page of
7 of the codex
'
the collection fol. Pertinet monasterio
S. Amandi in pabula ordinis sancti Benedict! tornacensis
diocesis.' From thence as we learn from another note,
'
'
Codex Tellerianus Remensis, 264, Reg. 4,483 it seems to
n.] Canons and Ecclesiastical Injunctions. 63
have passed into the Library of Letellier, Archbishop of

Rheims from 1671 to 1710, and next into the Royal
Library. It is highly probable that Autun or some place
in Burgundy was the birthplace of this MS., from whence
it may have been transferred to St. Amand during the
period when the Low Countries formed part of the dominions
of the Dukes of Burgundy, as intercourse between the two
countries must have been frequent at that time. The
Brussels MS. copy of the Angers Collection was formerly
the property of the Abbey of St. Peter at Ghent, of which
it contains a memorandum written in a hand of the twelfth
'
or thirteenth century Liber S. Petri gandensis ecclesiae.
:
Servanti benedictio tollenti maledictio. Qui folium inde

tulerit vel contrectaverit anathema sit.' There is a note of
its passing into the possession of the Jesuits in 1599 by the
'
gift of an abbot, as follows: Societatis Jesu ex dono
R. D. P. Columbani abbatis D. Petri Gandensis, 1599 V
Two other points remain to be considered in reference to
'
the Autun Canon whether the '

Fides sancti Athanasii
which it mentions was indeed the Qmc2inque, and what was
the precise date of Leodegar's Synod ?
In regard to the first of these points,was argued by it
Papebrochius that the Faith of Athanasius in this canon

2
nust refer not to the Quiczmque, but the Nicene Creed , by
which he means, no doubt, what is commonly called so by
modern Western theologians, though it would be more
accurately described as the Constantinopolitan Creed. But
the position is manifestly untenable. The title Fides '
'
sancti Athanasii or the like was commonly applied to the
Qiiicimque, and that beyond a question, as early as the
1
Maassen, Bibliotheca Latino, iuris canonici mamiscripta. See Sitzungs-
berichte der Kaiserlichen Akadeinie, torn. Ivi.
2
Muratori, Anecdota, torn. ii. p. 223.
ninth century. On a former occasion, if I may venture

to say so, I have produced evidence, and shall by-and-by
1
reproduce it, from the Preface to the Oratorian Commentary ,
showing that is was probably so applied in the seventh

century, inasmuch as the Qidcunque was at that time
attributed to the great opponent of Arianism. But
I apprehend not a single well -accredited instance can be
found in the whole of antiquity of the Nicene Creed,
whether the Nicene Creed proper or the Constantinopolitan,
being thus entitled. How these two Creeds were described
in the seventh century is shown very remarkably by a MS.
we have alluded to the earliest MS. of the Herovall

collection Paris, Latin, 3,848 B, where they are inserted
just before the Autun Canon together with the other
definitions of the Faith of the five earliest General Councils
as recited and re-affirmed at the Lateran Synod held
A. D. 649. The first of the two is there entitled
'
Fides
Niceni Concilii cccxviii episcoporum,' the second Sym- '
bolum apud Constantinopolim cl patrum.' On the other hand,

the Athanasian Creed, which appears in the same MS.
among other documents preceding the Herovall Collection,

is entitled as in the Autun Canon Fides
'
sancti Athanasii
episcopi.' Moreover, that the compiler of the Herovall

Collection did not understand the Autun Canon to refer
to the Constantinopolitan, or Nicene Creed as we call it,
is plain from this, that for the Canon of Agde relating
'
to the Traditio Symboli,' which immediately followed the

Autun Canon in the Angers Collection, he substituted the
second canon of the Third Council of Toledo, which required
2
that Creed to be recited at the Holy Communion .
1
Early History of the Athanasian Creed, p. 37.
2
Canones selecti, caput primum, apud Migne, Patrol. Latino, torn. xcix.
PP 99 'j 99 2 -
ii.]
The late Professor Swainson, while rejecting Papebrochius's

hypothesis, being unwilling to admit the Quicimque to be
'
the Fides Athanasii of the Autun Canon, suggested that a
'
Confession of Faith, frequently met with in ancient collections

of canons and described by various titles, for instance Ex- '
positio Fidei Catholicae,' 'Fides Romanorum,' 'Fides Eccle-

siae Romanae,' and attributed to several different authors,
St. Athanasius for one, might be the document intended 1 .
But this suggestion is also untenable. No doubt the Con-

fession alluded to was attributed to Athanasius as early as
the ninth century, for it is quoted as his work by Hincmar
and Ratramn in the latter half of that century, but it never
attained to such a position of authority and esteem as to be
recited in the offices of the Church and to be required to
be learnt by heart by the clergy. Indeed it is altogether
unsuited for use in Church services. Nor can it be said that
itwas ever commonly called the Faith of Athanasius, as the
2
Quicunqiie was beyond question The conclusion therefore
.
of Waterland on this point may well be accepted, that

there is no reasonable doubt to be made but that the Coun-
'
3
cil of Autun in the canon intended the Athanasian Creed .'
With regard to the date of the Autun Synod, over which

Leodegar presided, much variety of opinion has been ex-
pressed, and it is impossible to fix it precisely, our know-
ledge of the Council being derived solely from the canons
belonging to it, which are contained in the Angers and
4
Herovall Collections, and another edited by Delalande .
The Nicene and Apostles' Creeds, by C. A. Svvainson, pp. 257, 271, note.
1
2
This Confession is printed in Appendix H
of Early History of the Atha-
nasian Creed by G. D. W. Ommanney and some account of it may be found
;
in the same volume, pp. 202-209.

3
History of the Athanasian Creed, p. 23. Oxford edition, 1870.
1
Conciliorum antiquorum Galliae a birmondo cditomm supplementa opera
et studio P. Delalande, pp. 70, 71. Paris, 1666.
F
Sirmond assigns the year 670 as the date; Mansi 677;

D. Ruinart, the authors of Gallia Christiana^ and Pagi,
who are followed by Dom Pitra in his life of St. Leger, 661.
Of these Sirmond's opinion seems the most probable, as in
670 Leodegar was at the zenith of his power, being at that
time, according to his biographer Ursinus, Mayor of the

Palace under Childeric. At any rate it is very improbable
that the Synod took place after the year 673, when he was
disgraced by the king, compelled to leave Autun, and
placed in confinement at Luxeuil. The rest of his life with
a brief interval was a continuous course of trouble and
hardship, and was spent for the most part in prison. Both
of his contemporary biographers make mention of a Synod,
which was summoned by King Theodoric in 677 and
attended by a large number of bishops. But this Synod
was not held at Autun, but at the royal palace, and it
appears to have been called for political purposes solely.
Nothing is said of the transaction of any ecclesiastical
business. Several bishops were deposed, but apparently for
political offences. Leodegar, who had been for two years

in prison at Fiscamnus, was cited to appear, not to take
part in the Council, for he had previously been deposed
from his bishopric, but to answer the charge, brought
against him by his foe Ebroin who was then in power as
Mayor of the Palace, of being concerned in the murder of
Childeric. He was condemned and treated with indignity,
1
and in the next year 678 he was put to death .
3. In a Capitulare or Episcopal charge addressed

to the Presbyters of his Diocese by Theodulf, Bishop
of Orleans, the first in order of the admonitions or in-
1
See the Life of Leodegar by Ursinus, and an anonymous life dedicated to
his successor in the bishopric of Autun, Ermenarius, in Mabillon, AA. o. s. Ben.
saec. ii, and Migne, Patrol. Latina, torn. xcvi.
junctions is as follows :
'
Therefore we admonish you,
O priests of the Lord, that you both commit to
memory and thoroughly understand the Catholic Faith,

thatis, / believe, and, Whosoever will be saved, before all
things it is necessary that he hold the Catholic Faith V
The precise date of this Capitulare is uncertain, but it
must necessarily have been issued some time in the epis-

copate of Theodulf, which probably commenced shortly
before the Council of Frankfort, A.D. 794, at which he
is believed to have been present, and closed with his
death in the year 821. It must be distinguished from

the Capittda ad presbyteros of the same Bishop, which
were first edited by Baronius in his Annals, and afterwards
by Sirmond. In these, presbyters are instructed to learn
the Catholic Faith and to preach it to the people, every
one in his own Church. The term Catholic Faith used
in thisconnexion can have but one meaning 2 .
4. There is other evidence, which calls for our attention,

of the authorized use of the Athanasian Creed in the age
and dominions of Charlemagne, besides that furnished by
the Capitula and Capitulare of Theodulf. In October, 802,
a large convention of the counts and bishops of his realm
was held by Charlemagne at Aix-la-Chapelle, in which
among other things he issued a general command to the
clergy to live in accordance with the canons, and all the
laws of his dominion were read, explained, and amended.

Pertz subjoined to his notice of this convention, the
1
'Itaque vos, o sacerdotes Domini, admonemus nt fidem catholicam et
memoriter teneatis et corde hoc
Credo, et Quicimqtie vult
intelligatis, est,
salmis esse, ante omnia opus est ut teneat catholicam fidem.' Migne, Patrol.
Latina, torn. cv. p. 209. See also Baluze, Miscellanea, torn. ii. p. 99. The
document was edited by Baluze from a MS., No. 4310, in the library of Colbert,
of which he was the custodian.
2 '
Discite fidem catholicam, praedicate diligentissime, et earn populo praedi-
cate, unnsquisque in ecclesia vestra.' Migne, u. s., torn. cv. p. 206.
F 2,
acts ofwhich he remarks had never been published, four

1
documents, two of which are pertinent to our subject .
There is no reason to suppose that these two documents

were enactments of the council or convention of Aix ;
nor
does Pertz appear to have regarded them as such, but
rather to have produced them for the purpose of illustrating
the ecclesiastical discipline and requirements imposed upon
the clergy generally of Charlemagne's realm, at least in Gaul
and Germany. The first is entitled Capitiila examinationis
generalis, and was copied from a MS. of the commencement
of the ninth century, marked G. in, among the MSS. of St.
Emmeram at Ratisbon, now deposited in the Royal Library
at Munich. From
the date of the MS., clearly the docu-
ment must have been extant in the time of Charlemagne,
and possibly yet earlier. It consists of a series of episcopal
visitation articles or inquiries, the first being as follows :
'
Interrogo vos presbyter] quomodo credetis (sic] ut fidem

catholicam teneatis, seu simbolum et orationem dominicam
quomodo sciatis vel intelligitis (sic]' That the Athanasian
'
'
Creed is described here as Fides Catholica I have no
doubt ; firstly, because this was in all probability the
earliest title applied to it, and still more because it was
so described in other contemporaneous documents, for
instance, as we have just seen, the Capitula and Capitulare

of Theodulf, and in the Orleans MS. of the Commentary
attributed to that Bishop, in the Oxford MS. of the so-
called Fortunatus Commentary, and the Utrecht Psalter;
and lastly, because other authoritative documents, the
Autun Canon, the Capitulare of Theodulf already noticed,
the Capitula of Hetto of Basle, and the Capitula of Hinc-
mar to be noticed, expressly require it to be learnt by
the clergy, and a similar inquiry to that before us with
1
Migne, Patrol. Latino, torn, xcvii. pp. 246-249.
"] Canons and Ecclesiastical Injunctions. 69
respect to their knowledge of it is proved by a continuous

line of evidence to have been made by the bishops at
their visitations throughout the ninth century. Moreover,
it is evident that the Apostles' Creed, which is referred
to as simbohim, cannot be intended had the Nicene ;
Creed or the Constantinopolitan been intended, in either

case a more full and distinctive title might have been
expected \
These inquiries of the bishops at their visitations re-
specting the faith of presbyters were expressly

their
ordered to be made by the Capitularies of CharleSj which
were, it should be recollected, codes of statutes of Church

and State enacted by the sovereign with the consent of
the dignitaries both civil and ecclesiastical, and of the
people of his realm assembled in obedience to his sum-

mons 2 .
The other document referring to the Athanasian Creed

subjoined by Pertz to his notice of the Capitulare of the
1 ' ' ' '
In the expression fidem catholicam teneatis as fidem catholicam
'
obviously denotes a formulated Creed, being contrasted with simbolum,'
' '
teneatis no less obviously refers to the learning that formula by heart. In
that sense the verb tenereis distinctly used more than once
by St. Augustine.
Thus, in a sermon on the Lord's Prayer, addressed to the candidates for
Baptism just before Easter Sermo Iviii he says
'
Symbolum reddidistis
: . . .
Quia ergo quomodo credatur in Deum et accepislis et tenuistis et reddidistis,'

you have received and learnt by heart and recited the Creed, accipite
'
i. e.
hodie quomodo invocetur Deus.' Afterwards he continues Tenete ergo et

:
'
hanc Orationem quam reddituri estis ad octo dies. Quicunque autem vestrum
non bene Symbolum reddiderunt, habent spatium, teneant.' This use of the
word is no less clear in the next discourse it occurs also in Ser. ccxii and
:
'
ccxiii. The word ' memoriter is therefore not absolutely necessary to the
sense here, but it occurs in a similar connexion in Theodulf and Regino, and
may have been omitted by a copyist's or printer's error.
2
'Ut episcopi cliligenter discutiant per suas parochias presbiteros, eorum
fidem, baptisma, et missarum celebrationes, ut et fidem rectam teneant, et
baptisma catholicum observent et missarum preces bene intelligant et ut psalmi
digne secundum divisiones versuum modulentur.' Capitulare of 789 A. D.
cap. 69. This is repeated in the Capitulare of March, 802, cap. 28 ; Migne,
Patrol. Latina, torn, xcvii. pp. 174 and 238.
'
year 802 is headed, Capitula de doctrina Clericorum.
Haec sunt quae omnes ecclesiasticos.'
iussa sunt discere
He gives as his authority for the text two Freising MSS.
in the Munich Library C. K. 3 of the ninth century and
C. I. 26 of the tenth containing copies of Isidorus de
OfficiiS) one taken from the other, at the end of which on
a spare leaf this document occurs. It is not in any sense
a Capitulare or collection of authoritative injunctions or
canons, but simply a list, with no sign of authorship or

date, of formulae, offices, books of instruction, and other
things, which, as stated by the heading, the clergy were

required to learn, the first in order being Fidem catho-
'
licam sancti Athanasii et cetera quaecunque de fide,' the

two next the Apostles' Creed and the Lord's Prayer
with its exposition. Rather more than twenty years ago,
the Rev. E. S. Ffoulkes made the startling announcement
that the Qtiicunque was first published by Charlemagne
in the year 802, and that as the work of Athanasius,
though he knew all the while that it had been recently

compiled by Paulinus Archbishop of Aquileia and as his :
authority for the statement, he produced the above memo-

randum printed by Pertz from the Munich Library,
describing it as contained in the Capitulare of Charles 1
. .
Upon this Professor Stubbs, now Bishop of Oxford, wrote

to Dr. Halm, the Royal Librarian at Munich, to ask him
to look at the MS. The latter replied that it was undated
'
and without historical context,' that it did 'not contain

the slightest indication which should lead us to regard it
as a Capitulare of Charles Pertz in fact had not done
;
so V Professor Stubbs stated subsequently that the MS.
1
The Athanasian Creed, by -whom -written and by -whom published,
P- 233.
2 '
Letter to the Guardian' by Professor Stnbbs, April 3, 1872.
does not contain even the title Capitula &c. Still the
document, though clearly not a Capitulare, nor a part of
one, may probably be considered from the date of the
MS. containing it, as it was plainly considered by Pertz,
to belong to the age of Charlemagne consequently it is :
another evidence of the use of the Athanasian Creed under

authority at that epoch.
From these two documents we pass naturally to the
consideration of the thirty-third Capitulum adopted at the
Council of Bishops and Priests of Charlemagne's realm,
which was held at Francfort under his presidency in 794.
It is as follows :
'
Ut fides catholica sanctae Trinitatis et
oratio dominica atque symbolum fidei omnibus praedicetur

et tradatur.' As there can be no doubt that the Apostles'
'
Creed here represented as symbolum fidei,' it is obvious
is
that either the Constantinopolitan, commonly called the

Nicene Creed, or the Athanasian, must have been intended
'
under the term fides catholica sanctae Trinitatis.' In the
opinion of Voss the former was referred to, in that of
Waterland the latter. Probably Waterland was right.
Besides being described by its most ancient title of
*
The
Catholic Faith' the Athanasian Creed might also be fitly
described as '
The Catholic Faith of the Holy Trinity'
more fitly indeed than any other Creed on account of
its more explicit statement of that doctrine. It declares
at the commencement of its dogmatic exposition The '
Catholic Faith' to be 'this, that we worship one God in

Trinity and the Trinity in Unity.' Accordingly we shall
find Regino in his disciplinary collection, compiled at the
beginning of the tenth century but drawn expressly from
earlier sources, applying to it a similar title, Sermo '
Athanasii episcopi de fide Sanctae Trinitatis' and so also ;
later in the same century Ratherius Bishop of Verona in

his admonition to his clergy. In the two last-mentioned

documents we saw Qnicunque was ordered, as
that the
well as the Apostles' Creed and Lord's Prayer, to be
learnt by the clergy ;
here it is ordered, as well as the
Creed and Lord's Prayer, to be recited in the congregation
and explained by instruction and comment. Such appears

to be the meaning of this Capitulum l Accordingly we .
find these three formularies inserted in the three extant
Psalters of the time of Charlemagne the Vienna Psalter,

Paris Lat. 13159, and the Utrecht Psalter after the
Canticles. Had the Nicene Creed so-called been intended,
we should have supposed that some more distinctive and
appropriate title would have been chosen.
5. The
Capitulare of Hatto or Hetto or Ahyto, as he
is variously described, Bishop of Basle, calls for notice
in the next place. The fourth of his Capitula requires
the Athanasian Creed to be learnt by heart by priests and
recited in the Office at Prime on Sunday 2 . Hetto was
1
Praedico is used in this sense of reading or reciting in the Church.
Isidorus, de Officiis, lib. i.

cap. 16, speaks of the Nicene Creed as 'Symbolum,
qnod tempore sacrificii populo praedicatur.' The passage is incorporated in
the work de Divinis Ojjiciis cap. Ivi ascribed but wrongly to Alcuin. And
the word is thus used in Theodnlf's address to his clergy, printed at the end of
'
his Capitula Migne, Patrol. Latina, torn. cv. p. 206 Discite fklem catho- :
licam, praedicate diligentissime, et earn populo praedicate, unusquis'que in

'
ecclesia vestra also in the sixtieth capitulum of the Capitulare of 789 A. D.,
:
and the twenty-ninth of that of March 802. Trado is used in the sense of
expounding, explaining ;
thus in the seventy-sixth cap. of the Capitulare
of 789, '
canonic! libri et catholici tractatus et sanctorum dicta legantur et
tradantur.' And the Chronicon Moissiacense in its account of the proceedings
at theCouncil or Convention held at Aix in October 802, states that Charles
the Great ibi fecit episcopis cum presbyteris seu diaconibus relegi universes
'
'
canones, quos synodus praecepit, et pleniter iussit eos tradi ; also that
. . .
'
similiter ipse synodo congregavit universes abbates et monachos qui ibi aderant,
et ipsi inter se conventum faciebant, et legerunt regulam sancti patris Benedict!
et earn tradiderunt sapientes in conspectu abbatum et monachorum.' Pertz,
Monumenta Germaniae Scriptorum, torn. i. pp. 106, 107.
a
Quarto, ut Fides sancti Athanasii a sacerdotibus discatur et ex corde die
'
consecrated Bishop of Basle A.D. 806, and he died in 836*

He was Abbot of the monastery of Augia the rich, or
Reichenau, in the diocese of Constance.
6. We have seen that the use of the Athanasian Creed
was the subject of episcopal admonitions and inquiries in

the time of Charlemagne, and that too apparently under
the sanction and authority of his capitularies. Its use was
also enjoined upon the clergy in the reign of the Emperor

Lothair as a matter of canonical duty respecting which
they were bound to give account to the bishop in synod,
and were liable to incur censure in the event of dis-
obedience. Of this I have found evidence, which has
hitherto escaped notice, in the British Museum MS. Addit.
19, 725, which in the judgement of Mr., now Sir E. M.
Thompson, as he kindly informed me, was written in Ger-

many in the early part of the tenth century. On
63 v. f.
'
there is the following rubric :
Incipit exposicio de xv
capitulis de canon (sic]

de quo 3 (sic] sacerdos rationes red-
dere debet in sinodo.' The
of these capitula has forfirst
its subject the nature of a canon and its contents

'
Quid :
sit canon vel quid contineatur in canone.' The second has

'
for its subject :
Qualiter fides catholica et credatur et
'
observetur ;
and itconcludes Secundum fidem quia *
:
'
exposita est in Nicena sinodo a tricentis decem et hocto

(sic] episcopis
continens hanc (sic] modum Credimus in :
unum Deum Patrem omnipotentem omnium visibilitim et in-

2
visibilium factorem ;
fidem enim Athanasii episcopi in hoc
opere censuimus observandam et simbolum Apostolorum

con 3 tradicionibus et exposicionibus sanctorum patrum in
his sermonibus adnotatis.' The direction to observe the
Dominico ad horam primam recitetur.' Labbe, Concilia, torn. xiv. p. 391,
edit. 1769, Venetiis.
1 2 '
Probably a mistake for 'quae.' Possibly an error for etiam.'

3 '
Clearly for cum.'
Athanasian Creed no doubt implies that it should be learnt

by. heart and recited by the clergy, as enjoined by the
Canon of Autun, and the Capitulum of Hetto or Hatto,
just referred to, and that of Hincmar, which we shall
notice next ;
and this, it must be remarked, is imposed as
a matter concerning which the priest must render account
to the bishop in synod or visitation, as we should say,
according to the title of these capitula quoted above, the

neglect of which too would subject him to canonical cen-
1
sure, as we find expressly stated in the last of the series .
The of these capitula and the locality of their

date
enactment are indicated approximately by the thirteenth
'
of the series, which has for its subject, Prayers for the
Lord King and his faithful people,' and directs that in '
'
Psalters and Prayers and Masses supplications should be

made for
'
the most pious and serene
Emperor Lothair and
Lord would grant them life and health
his sons, that the
and peace and victory for the government of the Church
and our perpetual peace 2 Clearly then these capitula
.'
must have been composed between the year 840 when

Lothair became sole Emperor on the death of his father
Louis the Meek, and 855 the date of his own death, unless
1
The fifteenth capitulum says :
'
Haec, fratres karissimi, quae supra scripta
sunt, admonemus et deprecamur, ut cum bono animo ac fide devota teneatis.
Qui vero neglexerit, sciat se canonicis interdictis subiacere.' These capitula
were clearly issued under episcopal authority.
2
De oracionibus quae pro domno rege
'
et filiis eius vel pro omnibus
fidelibus eius admonicionem facimus ut in salmis et oracionibus ac missis cum
summa devocione Deum
deprecare studeatis una nobis ut vitam et sanitatem et
pacem et victoriam piissimi et serenissimi imperatoris Lotharii et filiis eius
doininus tribuat ad gubernacionem ecclesie et ad nostram perpetuam pacem.'
In Litanies, at the end of Psalters, petitions sometimes occur for the reigning
Sovereign or Pope ; and these are obviously a clue to the date of the books in
which they appear and the locality which gave birth to them. We shall have
occasion to adduce some instances in point by-and-by. A similar remark
might be made in regard to names mentioned for the purpose of intercession in
Missals.
they were drawn up in 833 and the following year when he

reigned for a short time as sole Emperor during the depo-
sition and imprisonment of his father. And in all proba-
bility they were enacted at some place situated between
the Meuse and the Rhine, as by the treaty of Verdun,
A.D. 843, his dominions were limited to the long strip of
country bounded by the Meuse, the Sa6ne, and the Rhone

on the west, and by the Rhine on the east, and to Italy.
There is no reason to
suppose that the last-named country
was the original home of this collection.
It must be remarked that the two first of these fifteen
capitula appear to be drawn from documents which must

have existed prior, perhaps considerably prior, to the, com-
pilation of the series in the reign of the
Emperor Lothair.
Both of them bear internal evidence of a higher antiquity ;
and it is remarkable that in the printed editions of the

works of Bishop of Amiens, they are found at the
Jesse,
end of '
Epistola de Baptismo,' as forming part of it,

his
although they have no connexion with the subject of which

it treats. Galland has added the following note with re-
spect to them :
'
Fortasse haec ad alium auctorem per-
tineant, qui ante synodum v vixit V No doubt his
conjecture as to their date was based upon the mention
which the first of the two makes of the first four General
Councils, as the exponents of the Faith. A similar docu-
ment drawn up after the Sixth Council would have noticed
the six Councils in the same connexion. Whether the
second Capitulum was from the same source as the first,
and therefore contemporary, must be uncertain. But it is
evident fromits language, which we have quoted, that it
must have been drawn from an authoritative work con-

taining directions concerning the use of the Creeds, together
1
Migne, Patrol. Latina, torn. cv. pp. 793, 794.
with expository discourses upon them. And hence it is

a clear testimony, not only to the canonical use of the
Athanasian Creed in the time of Lothair, but also to its
use under Church authority at some earlier period, though
we cannot determine for certain the date of the injunction
nor its author.
Why these two capitula were edited in this close con-

nexion with the treatise of Jesse respecting Baptism, we
are not informed. The reason may be simply that the first
edition found them in a MS. placed immediately after that
work, and hence concluded that they formed part of it ;
and other editors have blindly followed the leader.

7. Our next instance carries us into the dominions of
Charles the Bald, brother of Lothair. At a Synod held
at Rheims under Archbishop Hincmar,
in the year 852,
certain capitula were enacted to be committed to memory

and carefully observed. The first of these requires every
presbyter to learn the exposition of the Creed and Lord's
Prayer in accordance with the traditions of the orthodox
Fathers, and from thence diligently to instruct the people
entrusted to' his care also to understand the preface of the
;
Canon of the Mass and the Canon itself, and to be able to

say it distinctly and from memory as well as the prayers of
the Offices he must also be able to read well the Apostles
;
the Epistle and Gospel, and to recite in regular

i.e.
course and by heart the Psalms with the usual Canticles.

And it concludes :
'
every presbyter commit to

Moreover, let
memory the discourse of Athanasius concerning the Faith,
commencing Whosoever will be saved, and understand its

meaning and be able to enuntiate it in common words,'
i. e. no doubt in the vernacular *.
1 '
Necnon et sermonem Athanasii de fide, cuius initium est :
Quicunque
viilt salvus esse, memoriae quisque commendet, et sensum illius
intelligat, et
ii.]
In the year 889 Riculfus, Bishop of Soissons in Bel-

8.
gica Secunda or the ecclesiastical Province of Rheims,

addressed a series of capitula or authoritative instructions
to his clergy, not only exhorting them to obedience, but
warning them of its necessity by the threat of deposition
in the event of wilful negligence. The fifth is as follows :
'
Likewise we admonish each one of you, that he apply
himself to learn by memory and with truth and accuracy
the Psalms and the discourse of the Catholic Faith com-
mencing Whosoever will be saved^ and the Canon of the
Mass, and the ordinary Offices and the Order of the Calen-
1
dar .' Riculfus is believed to have died in the year
903.
9. Early in the tenth century, according to Morinus in
the year 906, Regino Abbot of Prum, by the command

of Rathbod Archbishop of Treves, edited a manual of
ecclesiastical discipline. The work consists of a collection
of episcopal visitation articles inquiries, which it was the
duty of bishops to make either personally or by their

officers respecting the ecclesiastical and religious condition
of the parishes of their several dioceses. It is expressly
drawn from various councils of the holy Fathers and decrees
of the Roman Pontiffs, and is divided into two books, the
first relating to the clergy, the second to the laity. The
eighty-fifth article or capitulum of the first book is as
'
follows :
'
Whether he,' i. e. the priest, learn by memory
verbis communibus enuntiare queat.' Hincmari Capitula Synodica, I. cap. i.
See Migne, Patrol. Latnia, torn. cxxv. p. 773.

1
Item monemus ut unusquisque vestrum
'
Psalmos et sermonem Fidei
Catholicae, cuins initium Quicunque vult salmis esse et Canonem Missae ac
Cantum vel Compotum memoriter et veraciter ac correcte tenere studeat.'
' '
Migne, Patrol. Latina, torn, cxxxi. p. 17. Probably cantum here is an error
'
for '
canticnm.'
'
Canticum nocturnum atque diurnum noverit is the corre-
sponding direction in the Admonitio synodalis,' which I shall refer to by-and-
'
by. These capitula are entitled 'Riculfi statuta.'

the discourse of Bishop Athanasius concerning the Faith of

the Holy Trinity, commencing Whosoever will be saved,
and understand meaning and know how to enunciate
its it
in common words,' i.e. the vernacular 1 The book . is
concluded by a note declaring that 'the inquiries above

arranged in capitula should be confirmed by canonical
authority.'
Regino, according to Pertz, was Abbot of Prum from 892
to 899. During the rest of his life he resided in the
monastery of St. Maximinus in the suburbs of Treves ;
and
the fruits of his literary leisure there enjoyed are seen in his
books on Ecclesiastical Discipline, his Chronicon, and an
Epistle addressed to Rathbodus. There also he died. His
sepulchral stone, found in the year 1580, seems to assign
2
915 as the date of his death . Trithemius describes
him as a man of the highest erudition in the divine
Scriptures and honourably distinguished by his learning
in secular literature, the facile princeps among the doctors

of his age.
It must be added that Waterland claims for the above
article of inquiry quoted from Regino respecting the
Athanasian Creed so high an
the age of antiquity as
Boniface the middle of the eighth century, alleging the
authority of Baluze
3
How far he can be safely followed in
.
this particular we shall have occasion to consider in our
next section.
10. A document, closely connected with Regino' s work
'
1
Si sermonem Athanasii episcopi de fide sanctae Trinitatis, cuius initium
est Quicunqite viilt salvus esse memoriter teneat et sensum illius intellegat et
verbis communibus enuntiare sciat.'Reginonis Libri duo de Ecclesiastics

Disciplinis. S. Baluzius edidit Parisiis, 1671. Also Migne, Patrol. Latino,,
torn, cxxxii. p. 192.
2
Pertz, Monumenta, torn. i. p. 537. Preface to Reginonis Chronicon.
8
Waterland's History of the Athanasian Creed, Oxford edition, 1870,
p. 25.
and therefore illustrative of it, now demands attention. In

the Appendix veterum actorum annexed to his edition of
Regino's books on Ecclesiastical Discipline Baluze has

'
printed three forms of an 'Admonitio synodalis or episcopal

charge or injunction to the clergy, a document of the same
kind as the capitula of Theodulf of Orleans, of Hatto of
Basle, of Hincmar of Rheims, and the statutes of Riculf
of Soissons we may add also the Epistola Canonica, but
;
of a more comprehensive and complete character. The

difference between the three forms is not one of substance,
but only of language and detail such as would be the
natural effect of the lapse of time, perhaps also of the
variety of locality, in a document used during several ages

and in several countries. It is the same document in all
three forms. In the first, which is apparently the oldest,

edited by Baluze from two MSS. one dated A. D. 1009,
the other described by him as very ancient it is headed :
'
Admonitio synodalis antiqua a Diacono post Evangelium
'
legenda Episcopo et ceteris in ordine sedentibus ;

in the
second, Admonitio synodalis nova quae post Evangelium

'
legebatur ab Episcopo sedente in faldistorio. Ex Pontificali

Romano Augustini Patricii Picolomimbus Episcopi
de
(
Pientini'; in the third, Admonitio synodalis novissima ab
Episcopo legenda post Evangelium. Ex Pontificali Romano.'
In the the direction respecting the Athanasian Creed
first
'
is : Sermonem Athanasii de fide sanctae Trinitatis, cuius
initium est Quicunque vult, memoriter teneat et omni die
cantet'; in the second,
'
Simbolum Athanasii de Trinitate
et fide Catholica memoriter teneat'; in the third, 'Simbolum
Sancti Athanasii de Trinitate et fide Catholica memoriter
teneat V
1
Regino, de Disciplina Ecclesiastica, S. Baluzius edidit Parisiis, 1691,
pp. 602-607. AlsoMigne, Patrol. Latina, torn, cxxxii. pp. 455-458.
8o Documentary Evidence. [CH.
There is a note of Baluze on the subject, which is of so
great interest for the light it throws not only upon this
particular document, but upon the condition of ecclesiastical
discipline in antiquity, thatcannot forbear reproducing it
I
in substance. He
begins by stating it to be certain that
in ancient times bishops held a yearly visitation of their
dioceses, either in person or by presbyters or deacons of

approved character. It was the custom for priests of
country parishes to assemble every year in the city on
Maundy Thursday, for two reasons to answer the necessary
inquiries respecting their ministry and to receive the

chrism. Andan order was issued by Karloman at the
Synod where Boniface was present requiring every presbyter
to render to his bishop every year in Lent a formal account
of his ministry, whether as regards Baptism or the Catholic
Faith, or the prayers and the Order of Masses. Afterwards
this was changed, priests being no longer required to
assemble in Lent for this purpose. But they were still
required to attend the bishop's visitation once a year, and
'
'
at this synod the Admonitio was read by the deacon.
At a later period, as appears by the Ordo Romanus, it
became the custom for the bishop himself to read it, if he

wished. Baluze deems it to be unquestionable that the
'
'
form of inquiry the inquisitio as well as the 'admonitio,'
was not confined to one was in general use

diocese, but
throughout the West. He believes the latter document,
though held by some to be the work of Pope Leo IV,

to whom it is attributed in some ancient codices, to be of
higher antiquity and to have emerged at the same period as

the 'inquisitio.' And it is his decided opinion that the
'
inquisitio/ inasmuch as it contains references to pagan

habits and superstitions, was compiled in the time of
Boniface Archbishop of Mentz, or certainly not much later,
n.] Canons and Ecclesiastical Injunctions. 8r
being subsequently enlarged and amended to meet the needs

1
and customs of various Churches and provinces .
The Ballerini agree with Baluze in the opinion that both

' ' '
the inquisitio and admonitio
'
are as old in substance as
the age of Boniface. They believe them to be by the same
hand, and deny that the latter is the work of a pope,
2
deeming it to be of Gallic origin ,
The Mnquisitio' and 'admonitio' are co-ordinate docu-

ments, as is evident from the close connexion and cor-
respondence existing for the most part between them as

regards the subjects dealt with, arrangement, and language.
In form necessarily they vary, the one being a series of
inquiries, the other of orders or exhortations. The

correspondence is particularly observable in the closing part
relating to ritual, which I print from the latter document in
Appendix B. In the former, it should be added, there seem

to be a few subjects noticed, which are passed over in
silence by the latter.
The question which presents itself for our consideration

is, to what period we can trace the witness of these
documents in reference to the Athanasian Creed. Can we
with Waterland allege it, and that on the authority of
Baluze, to be as early as the time of Boniface or the middle
of the eighth century? To this it must be answered, firstly,
that, inasmuch as Baluze. held that these documents, though
originating in the time of Boniface, received subsequently

additions and emendations, it is impossible to claim his
authority for attributing that antiquity to any particular

contained in them, as for instance the clause relating to the
1
Note by Baluze in his edition of Regino, p. 534. Also Migne, Patrol.
Latina, torn, cxxxi. pp. 405-408.
2 '
See Admonitio in Ratherii Synodicarn,' Migne, Patrol. Latina, torn,
cxxxvi. p. 551.
G
82 Documentary Evidence. [CM.
Athanasian Creed. And secondly, there are three varieties

of the 'Admonitio synodalis' or Sermo synodalis,' which
'
contain no mention of the Quicunqite. They are printed in

Labbe's Concilia in three parallel columns 1
. The first is
Commonitorium,' from Martene, by whom it was

'
entitled
originally edited from two MSS. of the thirteenth century,

with the title,
'
Commonitorium cuiusque episcopi ad
sacerdotes sibi subditos exterosque ministros cuiusque ordinis
ecclesiastici V The second is entitled,
'
Homilia Leonis
Papae IV.' From what MSS. it is edited is not stated.
The third, 'ex codice Lucensi saeculi xii/ is entitled
'
Epistola Leonis in Synodo legenda.' The two last of
'
these omit altogether the closing part of the 'Admonitio

as edited by Baluze relating to ritual beginning
'
De
' '
'
ministerio and ending confitentem ;
but with this
exception, they are the same document as the

'
Admonitio.'
It would seem probable that thisomitted portion, which
includes it will be observed the clause relating to the
Athanasian Creed, formed no part of the original document,
but was a subsequent addition.
That clause however, and indeed much besides of the
omitted portion, may be distinctly traced up to the time of
Hincmar of Rheims, if not Baluze, taking into
earlier.
consideration the close resemblance, or rather identity,

between some of the capitula of Hincmar, the first of
which has reference to the Quicunque, and the correspond-
'
ing portion of the Inquisitio of Regino and therefore also

'
'
of the Admonitio,' both being the same, mutatis mutandis,
arrives at the conclusion, either that Regino made use of
1
Labbe, Concilia, edit. Florence, 1769, torn. xiv. pp. 890-898.
2
Martene et Durand, Amplissima Collectio, torn. vii. It is also edited by
'
Migne, Patrol. Latina, torn. xcvi. pp. 1375-1379; and described as Anonymi
saeculi viii. Commonitorium episcopale.'
some more complete Hincmar than those now

capitula of
existing, or else that both drew from a more ancient
formula as their common source. The latter alternative
he holds to be nearer the
truth. I confess it appears to me
not merely to be nearer the truth, but the truth. There

is no reason to suppose that Hincmar's capitula are but
an abbreviation of others more complete and copious, once

issued by him, but now lost 1 The peculiar title too .
'
'
Senno Athanasii de fide/ or
'
de fide Sanctae Trinitatis
' '
found in the of Regino, the Admonitio/ and
'
Inquisitio
the capitula of Hincmar, also in the Statutes of Riculfus
and the profession of Adalbert of Morinum, but not occur-
ring before the time of Hincmar, would seem to indicate
the use of some common source.
We cannot indeed adduce any document prior to the
capitula of Hincmar as containing the clause relating to

the Athanasian Creed, which is common to them and to the
'
'
Inquisitio of Regino nor can we affirm with certainty

;
' '
when it was united with the Admonitio synodalis in its

present form. But we know from the capitula of Lothair
that in the reign and dominion of that monarch the ob-
servance of the Quicunque implying the knowledge and
recitation of it was a matter concerning which priests were
bound to render account to the bishop
2
know further . We
from the evidence of Theodulf's capitulare, which was
3
in point of fact an episcopal admonition or charge and ,
4
of the two Munich manuscript capitula that in the time of ,
Charlemagne this was one of the subjects of admonition and

inquiry by bishops at their visitations. And probably it
1
For the opinion of Baluze above stated, see Reginonis Libellus de Ecclesias-
iicis Disciplinis Admonitio ad lector cm by the editor Migne, Patrol. Latina, ;
torn, cxxxii.
2 3 4
Above, sec. 6. Above, sec. 3. Above, sec. 4.
G 2
was so before his time : for in the first capitulare of that
monarch, dated 769-771, some capitula originally passed

at a synod held under Karloman in 742 are incorporated
and re-enacted, among them that quoted by Baluze and
before referred to, which decreed that every presbyter
should always in Lent render a formal account of his
ministry to the bishop, whether as regards Baptism, or the

Catholic Faith, or the prayers and order of masses l Now .
as this capitulum was not a new enactment on the part of

Charlemagne, but a portion of the ecclesiastical legis-
lation inherited from his predecessors, so it seems probable
that the procedure which was practised in his time in

compliance with its terms was nothing new either, but the
same which had existed previously ever since its primary
enactment, that as in his reign the account, which priests
were obliged to render respecting their faith, involved an
account of their knowledge of the Athanasian Creed, so it
had been previously under Pepin and Karloman.
ii. Our next instance is connected with the north of
Italy. Atto, already mentioned with reference to the
' '
Epistola Canonica as Bishop of Vercellae in the middle

of the tenth century and a very learned theologian and
canonist, addressed a capitulare to his clergy consisting of
a hundred chapters or capitula. The fourth of these is
word for word the first capitulum of the '
Epistola
Canonica,' of which, as I have before said, he had found
a copy in his cathedral library. Having previously
1 '
Decrevimus iuxta sanctorum canones, ut nnnsquisque presbyter in parrochia
habitans episcopo subiectus sit illi, in cuins parrochia habitat, et semper in
quadragesima rationem et ordinem ministerii sui, sive de baptismo, sive de fide
catholica, sive de precibus et ordine missarum, episcopo reddat.' Migne,
Patrol. Latina, torn, xcvii. p. 123. Boniface, Archbishop of Mentz, was
present at the synod from which this capitulum originally issued, as stated
above, and mentions it in his epistle to Cuthbert.
quoted that capitulum I feel it unnecessary to quote it

again here but it is clearly very pertinent to draw atten-
;
tion to the remark of D'Achery with regard to the meaning

' '
of the term Fides Catholica which it requires the clergy
to learn by heart, or rather the meaning attached to
the term by Atto. '
In Attonis Capitulari,' he says.
'
animadvertenda sunt :
primo haec verba fides catholica
signant symbolum Athanasii.' That such was the mean-
ing in which Atto employed the words in this capitulum
is the more clear, because in two passages of his Capitulare
'
the Apostles' Creed is described as Symbolum and '
when it is considered that before this it was no uncommon

thing for bishops to require the Athanasian Creed to be
learnt by priests, as we have seen by several instances, the
matter can no longer admit of doubt. Atto's Capitulare
*
was first edited by D'Achery
Spicilegimn from in his
a Vatican MS., No. 4332, a copy being sent to him from

Rome in 1664 by Johannes Bona.
Another episcopal injunction of the tenth century

i a.
also relates to North Italy. In Lent, 966, Ratherius,
Bishop of Verona, held a visitation of his clergy, at which

he made the usual inquiries respecting their faith. The
result, as stated by himself, was that he found by far the
majority of them to be ignorant even of the Apostles'

Creed. With a view to correct this gross state of clerical
'
ignorance he addressed a charge or

'
synodica to his
clergy, which is still extant and is described by the Bal-
lerini, the editors of his works, as 'of all the documents of

the tenth century relating to ecclesiastical discipline the
most excellent and celebrated 2 .' This charge commences
with a direction to learn without delay the three Creeds
1
Migne, Patrol. Latina, torn, cxxxiv. pp. 10-23.
2
Admonitio ad Synodicam Migne, Patrol. La/ma,
;
torn, cxxxvi. p. 551.
by which the bishop emphasizes by adding

heart, Who- :
'
ever wishes to be or to become or to continue a priest in

our diocese let him recite to us by memory these three
Creeds when next he shall be cited by us to attend here 1 .'
Subsequently, by way of instructing his clergy more fully in

their duties, he repeats, but without acknowledging the
source of his materials, the Admonitio,' or Sermo Syno-
' '
'
adding the words as I before said to its direction

'
dalis,'
for learning the Athanasian Creed. How these commands

were received by his clergy we learn from his own words :
'
When I saw that they were disobedient, and inquired what
measures could adopt canonically in consequence, fear
I
took possession of some of them, so much so that they

promised me assistance for my journey 2 ,
and engaged that
henceforth they would sing the definition 3 of the blessed
Athanasius, and to the best of their power would fulfil the
rest of my requirements.
5
He thanks God that the clergy
both of the city and country churches were prepared to do
this. Not so the Canons of the Cathedral, who were per-
sistently contumacious, and he tells them mind plainly
his :
'
As for you, O Cardinals, who after the example of the
Scribes and Pharisees of old are guiding these people into
the way of perdition, I see that you still continue so
rebellious as to choose rather to be damned for ever with
Anus the enemy of this same
than by consenting to
faith,
sing it publicly like the clergy of other Churches to yield
1 '
Ipsam ficlem, id est, credulitatem Dei, trifarii parare festinatis hoc est,
secundum Symbolum, id est,collationem Apostolorum, sicut in Psalteriis
correctis invenitur, et illam,quae ad Missam canitur, et illam Sancti Athanasii,
quae Qiiicunqiie vuli salvus esse.
ita incipit :
Quicunque vult ergo sacerdos in
nostra parochia esse aut fieri aut permanere illas tres memoriter nobis recitet,
cum proxime a nobis hue vocatus fuerit.' Ratherii Synodica, uti supra.
2
He was contemplating a journey to Rome.
3 '
Descriptionem.'
Canons and Ecclesiastical Injimctions. 87
to my wishes, and thus yielding to save your souls From V

these words of Ratherius it appears that the neglect of the
Veronese clergy to use the Quicunque in the Church
serviceswas an exception to the general rule in the tenth
century ;
and being a travelled man he was a competent
witness upon the subject.
The reluctance of the clergy generally and the positive
refusal of the Canons to comply with the injunction of
Ratherius need not be imputed to any objection on their
part to the Athanasian Creed. Their conduct was but the
natural consequence of the relations existing at the time
between him and them, which were of the most hostile
character and the causes which produced this state of
;
things are clearly traceable to the extraordinary circum-

stances of his long might be
episcopate. Indeed, it
questioned whether at this period he was Bishop of Verona

de iure as well as de facto. Originally a monk of Lobbes
on the Sambre in the diocese of Cambrai, he was con-
secrated Bishop of Verona in 93 r in compliance with
a letter of recommendation to the office, which he obtained
from the Pope and the Roman Church. In 935 he was
put in prison at Pavia by Hugh, King of Italy, for a poli-
tical offence. On which occurred two years
his release,
after, he was banished to Como from thence he went into ;
1 '
Vos, Cardinales ita hinc manere aclhuc cerno rebelles, ut eligatis cum
. . .
inimico eiusdem fidei Ario in aeternum damnari quam hoc publice, ut aliarum
ecclesiarum clerici, cantando salubriter vinci.' Ratherii Jtinerarinm, n. l
j.
There are three classes of clergy mentioned in the above passage Titnlani,
Itti de plebibus, and Cardinales. The first, the Ballerini say in a note, were
the clergy of the town and suburban Churches, the second those of the country
Churches, country parishes being called plebes, and the third the Cathedral
Canons. They add that the Canons of Milan, Aquileia, Naples, Lucca, and
very many other cathedrals, were likewise called cardinales. That such is
the meaning of the term here is moreover clear from the fact of Ratherius after-
wards sarcastically alluding to the title canonici.
Gaul, and in 944 found his way back to his old monas-
tery of Lobbes, where he stayed until his return to Verona
in 946. There he was able to recover his bishopric by the
favour of Count Milo, another bishop, who had occupied
the see in his absence, being obliged to relinquish it. But
in two years he was compelled once more to leave, owing
to the determined opposition he encountered from the
clergy, and the superseded bishop returned to power. This

time he took refuge in Germany. After an ineffectual attempt
to recover his see in 951 he virtually abdicated his claim to
it getting himself appointed to the bishopric of Liege
by
through the influence of Bruno, Archbishop of Cologne ;
but Liege, following the example of Verona, would not

away with him and in 961 he was reinstated in the
;
bishopric of Verona by the strong hand of Otho, then king,

soon after Emperor of Germany, the occupant of the see
at the time being necessarily in this as in the former in-
stance extruded. And
this expelled bishop, backed as he
must have been by a powerful party of friends and sup-

porters among the clergy, would prove, and he did indeed
prove, a thorn in the side of Ratherius, a constant element
of disquiet. If the circumstances of Ratherius's restoration
to the bishopric of Verona were most inauspicious, his

manner of administration was not calculated to smooth
down He
questioned the validity of the orders
matters.
of the clergy who had been
ordained by the bishops who
occupied the see during his absence, he told the married
clergy who had their wives living with them it appears
this was not uncommon must put away their
that they
wives above all, he gave deadly offence to the Canons by
;
attempting to deal with their property. The result was

that in the beginning of the year 965 the exasperation of
the clergy burst out into unjustifiable acts of violence.
They seized Ratherius and placed him in custody. It was
only a year after this happened that, having recovered his
liberty, he addressed his Synodica to his clergy, urging

upon them the discharge of their canonical duties,
full
particularly as regards the Creeds. Was it to be expected,

considering the situation, and especially the antecedents of
the bishop, that his injunctions, albeit they were in accord-
ance with the law of the Church, and its practice too in
well-ordered dioceses, would be received with willing ears
and obedient hearts? It only remains to add that after
a lapse of two years more the measure of his troubles was
complete forbidden by the Pope to meddle with the

:
property of the Canons and abandoned by his patron and

friend the Emperor, in 968 he quitted Verona, never to
return ; and, as before, the bishop who had been removed
to make way for him, was restored to the see. But he
found a patron in the then bishop of Liege, by whom
he was appointed in 971 to the abbacy of Lobbes, where in
early life he had embraced the monastic profession. There
he died soon after. The
strange vicissitudes of his life are
summed up in a distich of his epitaph :
'
Veronae praesul, sed ter Ratherius exsul ;
Ante cucullatus, Lobia, postque tuus 1 .'
13. There are three synodical injunctions issued under

episcopal authority for English dioceses in the thirteenth
century which demand attention in reference to the Atha-
nasian Creed.
The Constitutions of Walter de
Cantilupe, Bishop of
Worcester, are a series of episcopal injunctions or directions
for the clergy, similar to the Capitularia of Theoclulf,
and Hetto of Basle, and Hincmar and Hatto of Vercelli, and

the Admonitio Synodalis. They are described by Wilkins
1
See Ratherii Vita, Migne, Patrol. Latina, torn, cxxxvi. pp. 27-142.
'
as Constitutiones venerabilis patris Walter! de Cantilupo,
Dei gratia Wigornensis episcopi, in sancta synodo sua in
Cathedrali ecclesia promulgatae in honorem Dei et sanctae

ecclesiae in crastino S. lacobi Apostoli anno Domini MCCXL
anno pontificatus sui tertio.' The article relating to the
teaching of priests directs that each of them should have

'
at least a simple understanding of the Faith according to
what is contained in the Psalm which is called Qnicunque

vult, and in the greater as well as the lesser Symbol, that
in these they may know how to instruct the people com-
mitted to their care V
14. The Constitutions of Walter de Kirkham, Bishop of
Durham, issued A.D. 1255 or thereabouts, are a document
of the same nature as the Constitutions of Walter de
Cantilupe. The clause of the former relating to instruction

in the Faith so closely resembles in language the corre-
sponding clause of the latter, as to show either that the
one was drawn from the other or else that they both had
a common source 2
.
15. The Constitutions of Peter Quivil, Bishop of Exeter,

were published at a synod summoned by him and held in
Exeter Cathedral in the year 1287. In the twenty-first
chapter, which relates to the inquiry to be made respecting
the literary knowledge of ecclesiastical persons, he enjoins
1
Habeat etiam saltern quilibet eorum fidei simplicem intellectum secundum
'
quod continetur in psalmo, qui dicitnr Qiticnnque viilt et tarn in maiori qnam
nrinori Symbolo, ut in his plebem sibi commissam noverint informare.'
Wilkins, Concilia, vol. i.

p. 669, Londini, 1737.
2 "
Habeat qnoque unusqnisque eorum simplicem intellectum fidei, sicut in
'
Symbolo lam maiori qnam minori, quod est in psalmo Quz'cunyue vult et eliam
in Credo in Deum expressius continentur, necnou in Oratione Dominica, quae
dicilur Pater nosier, et salutatione beatae Mariae."Constitutiones Walteri de
Kirkham episcopi Dunelmensis.' Wilkins, Concilia, vol. i. p. 704. The text
has obviously undergone some corruption, which has rendered it nngrammatical
and unintelligible.
the archdeacons to be diligent in such inquiries to make

and hold frequent trial of parish priests, whether they
know the Decalogue . . . also the seven deadly sins . . . also
the seven Sacraments of the Church . . . and whether they
have a simple understanding of the articles of the Faith of
Christians, as they are contained in the Psalm Qincunque
viilt and in both Symbols, in which articles they are bound
to instruct the people committed to their care with all the
greater earnestness, since none who believes not firmly the

Catholic Faith can be saved V This is probably the usual
form of inquiry made by the officials of English bishops
at their visitations in the thirteenth century, and it may be
earlier,from which it would appear that Walter de Canti-
lupe and Walter de Kirkham drew the language of their
injunctions. The former declares that in his directions he
follows in the footsteps of his predecessors. From these
codes, so to speak, we learn that the Athanasian Creed was

a subject of episcopal inquiry and direction in the middle
ages in our own country as well as on the Continent.

The Q^l^c^lnq^le is here termed a Psalm, because it was
at the time sung as a Psalm, and with the Psalms in the
service of the Church, and had been so sung for ages and ;
the fact of its being so called is an evidence of this use.

That these bishops of the thirteenth century regarded it at
the same time as a Creed is shown by their speaking of the
Articles of the Faith or the Faith being contained in it as
1 '
Singulis Archidiaconis iniungimus ut diligenter inquirant, qui rectores,

vicarii, aut sacerclotes in literatura enormem patiuntur defectum De paro- . . .
chialibus sacerdotibus frequenter assumant experientiam et habeant, an sciant
decalogum ... an etiam sciant septem peccata mortalia sciant etiam . . .
septem sacramenta ecclesiastica et an articulorum fidei Christianorum

. . .
simplicem habeant intellectum, prout in psalmo Quicimque vult et in utroqne

Symbolo continentur; in quibtis plebem sibi commissam tanto tenentur studio-
sius informare, quanto quilibet, qui Fidem Catholicam firmiter non crediderit,
salvus esse non poterit.' "Wilkins, Concilia, vol. ii. p. 144.
well as in the Apostles' and Nicene Creeds. Waterland
refers to instances of the Apostles' Creed, and even the
Lord's Prayer, being called a Psalm.
'
1 6. In the Ordo ad visitandum infirmum
'
according to
the old Use of Salisbury, printed in Maskell's Monumenta
1
Ritualia ,
the dying man, if a priest, is called upon to
express his assent to a form of P"aith consisting of the
fourteen Articles issued in Archbishop Peckham's Con-
stitutions, the seven first of which relate to the Trinity,
the remainder to the Incarnation, the condemnatory clauses
of the Quicunque being annexed. These Articles are
described in Peckham's Constitutions as a comprehensive
and brief summary of the Articles which all the Ministers
'
of the Church are bound to know,' and hence, it may be
presumed, were considered a fitting Confession of Faith to

be made by a priest in his last moments : that they are
supplemented by the minatory clauses of the Quicunque

in order to enforce the necessity of a belief in the Catholic
Faith, thus summarily expressed, can only be regarded as

another proof that at the time when this Office for the
Visitation of the Sickwas compiled., the language of the
latter was familiar as household words to all who took
part in the services of the Church. This formula will be
found in Appendix C. It cannot be deemed earlier than
the Constitutions of Peckham, which were enacted at the
Council of Lambeth held A.D. 1281.
1
2nd edition, Oxford, 1882, vol. i.
p. 89.
CHAPTER III.
MANUSCRIPT COPIES NOW EXTANT, OR WHICH, THOUGH

NOW LOST, ARE KNOWN TO HAVE EXISTED.
OWING to the use of the Athanasian Creed from a remote
period in the services of the Western Church, MS. copies
of it are exceedingly numerous, as it is commonly found
together with the Scriptural Canticles, which were also sung

in the congregation, at the end of Psalters. It is found also
in some collections of Canons and Formulae of Faith.

For the purpose of illustrating its antiquity and early use
and reception it will be sufficient to notice a very few
comparatively, including of course the oldest.

i. The earliest known MS. of the Athanasian Creed is
contained in a thin 4to volume of a few leaves deposited in

the Ambrosian Library at Milan, and bearing the press-
mark O. 313. Muratori, who was custodian of the library,
gives some account of the MS. in the second volume of his
Anecdota, published in 1698, and describes it as 'most
ancient, written a thousand years ago and more,' i. e. before
the eighth century. Montfaucon, who saw and examined
the MS. when he visited the library in the course of his
literary tour in Italy in 1698, pronounced it to be written

1
in the eighth century . The present librarian, Dr. Ceriani,
agrees with Montfaucon as to the date. Nor has any
1
Diarium Italicum, p. 18.
palaeographical authority, to the best of my knowledge,

ever placed it later. On the fly-leaf of the volume is a list
of contents in a modern hand
'
: In isto libro continentur
Dogrnatum fidei liber, Bachiarii Fides. Fides Catholica sen

simbolum S. Athanasii, ut aiunt, De ascensione Domini
Sermo, D. Hieronymi fides. Codex seculi VI.' This
'
' '
Dogmatum fidei liber is the Liber de ecclesiasticis

'
dogmatibus commonly ascribed to Gennadius of Marseilles,

sometimes to St. Augustine, and printed in the Appendix
to his works; the 'Hieronymi fides' is not the confession
which is generally thus entitled, but the 'Damasi Sym-

bolum.' Then follows a memorandum, apparently of the
first giving a somewhat amusing account of
Librarian,
the acquisition by Cardinal Frederick Borromeo of this
MS. Ambrosian Library, which he founded
for the Hunc :
'
codicem, qui ex Bibliotheca Bobii a S. Columbano insti-
tuta prodiit, Illustrissimo Cardinali Federico Borrhomae,

B. Caroli patrueli, dum Ambrosianam bibliothecam manu-
scriptis codicibus undique conquisitis instrueret, religio-

sissimi patres Ordinis S. Benedicti, simillimo prius munere
compensati, humanissime tradiderunt anno 1606. Antonio
Olgiato eiusdem bibliothecae Ambrosianae, quam primus
omnium tractavit, Praefecto.' The monastery of Bobbio
on the river Trebbia in North
should be noticed, Italy, it
was of Irish origin, founded by St. Columbanus in the year

613. The MS. we are speaking of is written in an Irish
hand, and probably in Ireland ;
so Dr. Ceriani thinks. The
Ambrosian Library received from the same source other
Irish MSS., among them the very interesting Antiphonary
of Bangor. On the first page of the MS. appears another

list of contents, written in an ancient hand, but not that of
the MS., which includes in addition to the documents
named in the list on the fly-leaf five others, viz. Ambrosii '
ni.] Manuscript Copies. 95
Confessio Fidei, Hieronymi regula Catholica Fidei, Libellus

de Trinitate, Ambrosii de Trinitate libri tres, Eiusdem
libellus Fidei.' These are not to be found in the MS., nor
were they time of Muratori, and he adds that to all
in the
'
appearance they never were included in it, inasmuch as
it is
complete and shows no sign of mutilation anywhere V
The Athanasian Creed commences on f. 14. r., without
any title or introduction, immediately after the conclusion
of the '
Bachiarii Fides.' The text presents no material
diversity from the ordinary type. The only one which

'
really calls for notice is the addition of the words patri et
'
filio coaeternus estafter 'procedens' in ver. 22. But this
is sufficiently accounted for by the fact that in the three
other Confessions of Faith contained in this MS., two of
them it should be borne in mind preceding the Quicungue,
'
the Holy Spirit is described as patri et filio coaeternus.'
If my memory serves me right, the words occur twice in
the '
Bachiarii Fides.' What more natural under these
circumstances than that the copyist should insert them in
the Q.^l^cunq^te to bring it into harmony with the other
confessions then before him
have thought they
? He may
had been erroneously or inadvertently omitted. Or he may
have wished to emphasize the point. Besides, he was
evidently an inaccurate person. He was guilty of two
omissions which have been supplied by another hand, one
'
between the lines, the other in the margin sed patris
et fili et sps sci' in ver. 6, and 'ante saecula genitus'
in ver. 29. He certainly wrote

'
conversatione
'
in ver. 33,
the letters at being obviously erased. These of course are

mere inaccuracies, the results probably of carelessness, but
they are significant as showing that we have here not the
autograph of the author, but a mere copy of an earlier
1
Anccdota, vol. ii.
p. 224.
document. Muratori, itmust be added, has not given an

accurate transcript of this text, and has thus misled
Waterland. The words in ver. 38,
'
resurgere habent cum

'
corporibus suis et,' are not omitted as he states, only '

in is
read 'cum': 'prohibemur' is read in ver. 19, not

for
prohibemus.' I have printed collations of the MS., which

e
I have twice examined, in Appendix E.

The Creed is immediately followed by this apostrophe to
the Blessed Virgin :
'
Lacta., mater, eum qui fecit te, quia
talem fecit te, ut ipse Lacta eum, qui fructum
fieret in te.
fecunditatis tibi dedit conceptus, et decus virginitatis non

abstulit natus.' I have sometimes suspected that this might
be a fragment of some lost sermon or other work of

St. Augustine ;
it reflects so clearly his teaching respecting
the Incarnation and also his terse and antithetic style.

The resemblance might be illustrated abundantly ;
but the
subjoined passages will suffice for the purpose.

'
Panem
'
nostrum ilia i. e. Maria '
lactabat.' S. Aug. Ser. clxxxiv.
'
Quid mirabilius virginis partu Concipit et virgo est, parit
?
et virgo est.' Ibid. Ser. clxxxix. Nullo modo Christus '
matrem nascendo faceret deteriorem, ut cui munus fecundi-

tatis attulerat, decus virginitatis auferret.' Ibid. con.
Faust^t,m^ lib. xxix. cap. 4. Especially the following

apostrophe in one of his sermons on the nativity of St.
'
John the Baptist Fit in te, qui fecit te, fit in te, per
:
quern facta es imo vero, per quern factum est caelum et

:
terra, perquern facta sunt omnia, fit in te Verbum Dei caro,

accipiendo carnem, non amittendo divinitatem. Invenit . . .
te virginem conceptus, dimittit virginem natus. Dat

fecunditatem, non tollit integritatem.' Ibid. Ser. ccxcii.
A passage in a sermon, which appears among St. Augustine's
printed sermons, but marked as one of doubtful genuineness,
should be noticed in this connexion for the obvious
in.] Manuscript Copies. 97
resemblance it bears to the above antiphon, so to call it, in
the Ambrosian MS. :

'
Lacta eum, qui talem fecit te,
ut ipse fieret in te, qui tibi et munus fecunditatis at-
tulit conceptus, et decus virginitatis non abstulit natus.'

This sermon was probably the work of a disciple and
imitator of the great Latin Doctor, not St. Augustine's
own.
'
2. Diatribe' Montfaucon speaks of a copy of the
In his
Athanasian Creed belonging to the Abbey of St. Germain-
des-Pres at Paris, his own monastery, as having been
executed in the eighth century and before the time of
Charlemagne. He describes it as Sangermanensis noster
'
num. 257,' and adds that it was written in a Saxon hand

and had for
'
Fides Sancti Athanasii Episcopi
title
Alexandriae.' Waterland gives several collations of the

text 1
. This MS. seems to be now lost, unless it found its
way to St. Petersburg with a few of the St. Germain MSS.
at the close of the last century. It cannot be identified
with the Latin MS. 13159 of the Bibliotheque Nationale,
which we shall notice by-and-by, as the readings of the
two MSS. do not agree, judging from Waterland's collations.

And yet we should expect to find it in the Bibliotheque
Nationale, if anywhere, as the great bulk of the St.
Germain MSS. were transferred to that collection at the

time of the French revolution.
3. Mabillon in his book De Re Diplomatics prints as
a specimen of Saxon handwriting the first three verses of
the Athanasian Creed from a Corbie MS., No. 267 2 He .
does not assign any date to the MS. but as far as we can ;
judge from the facsimile, the character of the writing
1
See Waterland's History of the Athanasian Creed, pp. 176-191. Oxford
edit. 1870.
a
Mabillon, De Re Diplomatica, Neapoli, 1789, torn. i.
p. 366.
H
would seem to point to the eighth century as the date.

I should be sorry however to rest any argument upon
a judgement thus formed, facsimiles made before the
invention of photography not being always very accurate.
This MS. appears also to be lost: at least if it is still
in existence, its domicile is not known. The 300 MSS.

remaining at Corbie. in Mabillon's time were taken to Amiens
in 1791. Of these, sixty -five were removed in 1803 to the
Bibliotheque Nationale at Paris and formed into a distinct
collection called Fonds de Corbie.'
'
Those left at Amiens
were entirely neglected for years, and many disappeared.
The residue were at length arranged and catalogued
in 1828 *.
4. The earliest extant MS. Psalter, in which the

Athanasian Creed occurs, or known to be extant, is the
celebrated and costly Psalter, written apparently by
command of Charlemagne before he became Emperor, and
sometime in the Pontificate of Hadrian I, which lasted
from A. D. 772 to 795. It belongs to the Imperial Library
at Vienna and an account of it is given by Lambecius, the
:
custodian of that collection at the close of the seventeenth
century, who discovered the MS. in the private library of

2
the Emperor Leopold I, in the year i666 . Denis also,
custodian of the library at the close of last century, in his
catalogue of the MSS. has furnished a description of this

codex, which is of value as corroborating his predecessor's
estimate of it, and supplementing some omissions on his
part. It is numbered 38 among. the theological manuscripts
of that catalogue.
1
See Rccherches sur Vancienne Bibliotheque de Corbie, par M. Delisle.
Paris, 1860.
2
Lambecii Commentariorum de Bibliotheca Caesarea Vindoboncnsi liber
secundus.
The MS. is written in an ornate

style, adopted no doubt
to do honour to the distinguished and royal personage to
whom as we shall see it is dedicated '
in letters of gold,'
'
says Silvestre, on white vellum intermingled with leaves

of purple and ornamented with some rich capital letters.'
On the first folio appear two sets of dedicatory verses. The
first is addressed by King Charles to Pope Hadrian, the
second by Dagulfus the writer of the MS. to King
Charles. These we will refer to more fully by-and-by,
after mentioning the contents of the volume, as we
learn them from the descriptions of Lambecius and
Denis.
The dedicatory verses are not followed immediately by
the Psalms, but by a variety of documents, which are
described by Lambecius as prolegomena and printed by
him in extenso. First we have five confessions of Faith
the Nicene Creed proper, including of course the anathema
annexed to it the Faith of St. Ambrose
;
it begins Nos ;
'
patrem et filium et spiritum sanctum confitemur,' and ends

'adversus veritatem rebellis est' ;
the Faith of Pope
Gregory the Great ;
the Faith of Gregory, Bishop of
Neo-Caesarea, here called Martyr ;
and the Faith of St.
Jerome. To these succeed immediately a metrical para-
phrase of the Lord's Prayer in hexameters, the first line
being
'
Sydereo Genitor residens in vertice caeli,' and the

'
'
Gloria in excelsis without any title. The occurrence of
these confessions of Faith, especially in the prefatory docu-
ments of the Psalter, is very remarkable and unusual.
I cannot recollect meeting with any similar instance. As
a rule, the Creeds which appear in Psalters are limited to the
Apostles' Creed, the Nicene, the Constantinopolitan, and

the Athanasian, the last being seldom omitted and frequently
appearing alone and they follow the Canticles. But this

:
H 2
ioo Documentary Evidence. [CH.
Psalter possibly, being written for such an eminent person

as Charlemagne, may be considered exceptional. similar A
remark may be made in reference to the '
Gloria in
excelsis.' I know of no other instance of it being placed,

as it is in this case : it is generally, if it occurs at all,
placed after the Canticles and before the Confession or

Confessions of Faith. After the 'Gloria in excelsis' in
our MS. come several documents relating to prophecy
or inspiration, particularly that of the Psalms, also to their
origin, authorship, use, excellence ;

some of which docu-
ments are not uncommonly found in the prefatory matter
of Psalters, at least of those which are of a more full and
elaborate character : the treatise '
Origo Prophetiae David,'

c
beginning David Jerome's preface to
Filius Jesse'; St.
the Gallican Psalter beginning Psalterium Romae dudum'; '
a tractate '
De Prophetia,' and three documents which in
the opinion of Lambecius are drawn from SS. Jerome,
Augustine, and Isidore of Seville the epistle of Pope ;
Damasus to St. Jerome, and the reply of the latter, denied

to be
genuine by Baronius some responsive ; verses,
Damasus and Jerome being represented as the interlo-
cutors ;
a piece '
de libro sancti Isidori qui incipit Liber
Psalmorum'; and Ruffinus's version of St. Basil's Preface
to the Psalms, here attributed to St. Augustine, and

beginning
'
Canticum Psalmorum animam decorat, invitat
angelos in adiutorium.' It is a Gallican Psalter; and the

Psalms are followed immediately by the usual Old Testa-
ment the song of Isaiah, Confitebor tibi
Canticles, viz. :
'
'
Domine,' the song of Hezekiah, Ego dixi, in dimidio

'
dierum,' the song of Hannah, Exultavit cor meum,' the
song of Moses,
'
Cantemus Domino,' the song of Habakkuk,
'
Domine, audivi auditionem tuam,' and the song of Moses,
'
Audite caeli.' It may be well to mention, that in Latin
Manuscript Copies. 101
Psalters, except those of the Ambrosian and Mozarabic

rites, these Canticles, which were sung severally on week-
days at Lauds with the Psalms, always appear in the above

order immediately after the Psalms 1 It will be sufficient .
to describe them henceforward as the ustial Old Testament

Canticles- In some MSS. they are appropriated to the
several' days on which they were used. Thus in the Bod-
leian Library Psalter of the eleventh century Canonici,
Eccl. 88 we have FR. II. Can. Esaie prophete. Confi-
'
tebor tibi &c. FR. III. Can. Ezekie Regis. Ego dixi &c.,'
and so on. In the Mozarabic and Ambrosian rites the
Canticles were different, so also in the Office of the Greek
Church. In the Vienna Psalter the Old Testament Canticles
'
are followed by the Benedicite entitled Hymnus trium
puerorum,' the Te Deum entitled 'Hymnus quern S.
Ambrosius et S. Augustinus invicem condiderunt,' the
'
Benedictus entitled Canticum Zachariae Prophetae/ the
Magnificat entitled
'
Canticum sanctae Mariae,' the Nunc
dimittis entitled '
Canticum Simeonis,' the Lord's Prayer
'
entitled Oratio Dominica,' the Apostles Creed entitled
Symbolum Sanctorum Apostolorum,' and the Athanasian
'
'
entitled Fides S. Athanasii Episcopi Alexandrini.' Here
the book closes, as it would appear from the account of
Lambecius.
It isobvious that whenever evidence of date is supplied
by the contents of an ancient MS., this must needs be the
most reliable kind of evidence for ascertaining the epoch
when it In this point of view the dedi-
was written.
catory verses inscribed on the first leaf of this Psalter are
specially important and interesting. It is not necessary
to quote them in full, only so much as is relevant to our
1
See Dictionary of Christian Antiquities, under articles on Canticles and
Psalmody.
purpose. In the first set, Pope Hadrian is thus addressed
by King Charles :
'
Hadriano summo papae patrique beato
Rex Carolus salve mando valeqne pater.
Praesul Apostolicae munus hoc sume cathedrae.
Hoc vobis ideo munus pie dedo sacerdos,

Filius tit mentem patris adire qneam.
Ac memorere mei precibus sanctisque piisque
Hoc domim exiguum saepe tenendo manu.
Inco]umis vigeas Rector per tempora longa

Ecclesiamque Dei dogmatis arte regas.'
In the second, the scribe Dagulfus thus addresses King

Charles :
'Aurea progenies, fulvo lucidior anno,

Carle, itibar nostrum, plebis et altus amor.
Rex pie, dux sapiens, virtute insignis et armis,
Quern decet omne decens, quicqtiid in orbe placet.
Exigui famuli Dagulfi sume laborem,
Dignanter docto mitis et ore lege.
Sic tua per multos decorentur sceptra triumphos,
Davidico et demum consociare choro.'
That Hadrian the Pope and Charles the King of these

verses were none other than Hadrian I and Charlemagne
was the unanimous opinion of the learned, until it was re-
cently suggested by the late Rev. E. S. Ffoulkes, that they

might be identified with another Pope Hadrian and another
King Charles, viz., Pope Hadrian II, whose pontificate
lasted from 867 to 872, and King Charles the Bald. The
suggestion suited the exigencies of Mr. Ffoulkes' theory :
for if this MS. was written during the Pontificate of
Hadrian I which terminated A.D. 795, inasmuch as it

contains the Athanasian Creed in its entirety, we have
here a clear disproof of that scholar's assertion that the
Creed was first published to the world in the year 802.
But the suggestion has nothing else to recommend it.
Manuscript Copies. .
103
The verses unquestionably understood with most

may be
fitness in the sense universally received until Mr. Ffoulkes's
theory saw the light. According to Charlemagne's bio-

grapher, Eginhard, his relations with Hadrian I were those
of the closest friendship, so much so, that he was moved
by the tidings of that Pope's death he grieved,
to tears :
as though he had lost a brother or a son. And this grief

found a lasting expression in a metrical epitaph which
he composed in his friend's memory :
'Post patrem lacrymans Carolus haec carmina scrips!,

Tu mihi dulcis amor, te modo plango, pater V
Three times during the pontificate of Hadrian he visited
Rome, and the second occasion in the year 781 was rendered
memorable by the baptism of his son Pippin, at which
the Pope stood Godfather. Eginhard also relates that
on several occasions Charlemagne was very munificent
to the Pontiffs 2 so that nothing can be more probable
,
than that he should have sent, or at least intended to

send, this costly Psalter, a present to Hadrian I. On the
other hand, the relations between Charles the Bald and
Pope Hadrian II,so far from being of a friendly character,

were certainly strained. There is but one instance on
record of the former sending any presents to the latter,
when Charles, in defiance of Hadrian's remonstrances,
having taken possession of the kingdom of his deceased
nephew Lothair, sought to appease the Pope's displeasure
by addressing to him a letter, and at the same time
requesting his acceptance of a cloth for the altar of St.
'
Peter's made out of his own golden robes, together with

two golden crowns decked with jewels V The presents
1
Opera Caroli Magni, Migne, Patrol, Latina, torn, xcviii. p. 1331.
'
2
Einhardi Caroli Magnimta, sec. 27.
3
Annales Bertiniani, annus 870. Migne, Patrol. Latino,, torn cxxv.
p. 1261.
being mentioned, it is natural to conclude that none others

were sent.
The verses of Dagulfus too are far more applicable to

Charlemagne than to Charles the Bald. They may be
compared with some verses which were inscribed on a book
of the Gospels, written by one Godescal at the command
of the former sovereign, and which refer particularly to
his second visit to Rome and the baptism of his son
Pippin in the year
781
1
. The language employed by
Godescal respecting Charlemagne bears an evident simi-
larity to the terms in which Dagulfus addresses the king
Charles to whom he dedicated this Psalter. By Godescal
Charlemagne is described as
'
Orbe bonus toto passim
laudabilis heros, inclytus in regno, fretus caelestibus armis
.... humili pietate superbus, providus ac sapiens, studiosus
in arte librorum' and 'rex phis': by Dagulfus Charles
is addressed as Rex pie, dux sapiens, virtute insignis et
armis, quern decet omne decens, quicquid in orbe placet,'
requested to read the Psalter docto ore/ What
'
and he is
conclusion can be drawn from this resemblance, but that

the king Charles of Dagulfus is none other than the king
Charles of Godescal ? Eginhard too dwells upon Charle-
magne's literary accomplishments, and his skill in the arts

of reading ecclesiastical books and singing the service,
particularly the -Psalter.

Nor are these dedicatory verses the only documentary
evidence of Charlemagne's connexion with this Vienna
Psalter. Prefixed to it is a document subscribed by John
Henseler, a public Imperial notary, which attests that it
had been originally used by Hildegardis, the wife of
Charlemagne, who after her death presented it A.D. 788
to the Church of Bremen, where it had been kept as
1
Migne, Patrol. Latina, torn, xcviii. pp. 1353, 1354.
a sacred treasure for 800 years and more, and publicly

exhibited once a year together with the other relics of the
Church. In proof of which are subjoined two clauses copied
word by word, as he certifies, from ancient manuscripts
of that Church ;
one of which gives a list of the posses-
sions and articles of value bestowed by Charlemagne upon
'
the Church, the last being Psalterium divae ipsius coniugis
literis aureis bene et subtiliter confricatum.' The other,
written in German, mentions the Psalter as one of the
sacred relics of the Church which were annually exhibited.
There is an obvious difficulty in reconciling the history
of the Psalter, which is thus attested on the authority of
the ancient records of the Church of Bremen, with the first
set of dedicatory verses, if they are understood to mean,
as they do apparently, that was actually given or sent
it
as a present to Hadrian by Charlemagne. But the diffi-

culty is not insurmountable. Lambecius cuts the knot
by denying altogether that Charlemagne gave the book

to theChurch of Bremen and he supposes that the Frank
;
king sent it at Rome as a present on occasion

to Hadrian
of his elevation to the papal throne in the year 773, and
that it remained there till 788, when Hadrian presented
it to St. Willehad upon his consecration as the first Bishop
of Bremen. This hypothesis accepted by
is Waterland ;
but, as Pagi remarks, it is entirely unsupported by evi-

dence, and it is highly improbable that the Pope should
have parted with a present conferred upon him by so
great a monarch, and that too in order to bestow it upon
a subject of that monarch. Pagi l therefore conjectures that
Hadrian, having originally received it from Charlemagne,
afterwards gave it to Hildegardis, when she accompanied
the latter to Rome in 781 and that thus it reverted to
;
1
Pagi, Critica in Annales Baronii, an. 783.
Charlemagne on her death, which took place two years

after.But this is also improbable. The simplest solution
of the difficulty appears to be that suggested by the authors
of the Nouveau Traite de Diplomatique, that the Psalter,
though dedicated to the Pope, from some cause or other

was never actually sent to him J .
Whatever be the
right reconciliation of the apparent
discrepancy between the dedicating verses of this interest-
ing Psalter and the ancient records of the Church of
Bremen as regards its history, their combined evidence may
be accepted as proving thus much that it was written
during, the pontificate of Hadrian I (not necessarily at

its commencement) Charlemagne and in his honour
for
by one Dagulftis, and was presented by that monarch

together with other gifts to the Church of Bremen. And
the date, which thus rests upon documentary evidence, is
confirmed by palaeographical authorities. The opinion of

Lambecius, who must have had a large acquaintance with
ancient MSS., has been already mentioned and is entitled
to consideration, though he may have been in error in
regard to the precise year to which he assigned the MS.,

viz. A.D. 772. Denis too, the Vienna librarian at the close
of the last century, dates it in his elaborate catalogue as
belonging to the eighth century, and in the most positive

2
manner asserts its antiquity as well as value . The Bene-
dictine authors of the Noiiveait Traite de Diplomatique,
who seem to have been well acquainted with the MS.,
place it at the latter part of the eighth century. And
1 '
Le
Psautier dedie par cet empereur au pape Adrian I., qnoiqu'il ue 1 'ait
pas re9U : peut-etre parcequ'il vint a motirir dans la circonstance, ou il devoit

'
lui etre presente n. s. torn. ii. p. 100.

;
But it could not have been the death
of the Pope, which occurred A. L>. 795) that prevented his receiving it, as it was
presented to the Church of Bremen in 788.
2
Codices manuscripti theologici Bibliothecae Palatinae Vindobonensis
Latini, vol. i.
pp. 54-70. Recensuit M. Denis a. 1793.
more recently Silvestre and his coadjutors express the

same opinion, founded apparently on a personal examina-
tion of the book. 'The writing,' they say, 'is a good
specimen of the renovated Roman or Caroline characters
'
in general usage from the end of the eighth century and ;
'
the general appearance of the volume at once indicates it
to be of the latter part of the eighth century No com- V
petent palaeographer, to the best of my knowledge, has
dated it later.
As I have described this Psalter as a Gallican Psalter,

and shall have occasion to use that term repeatedly, and to
mention Roman Psalters also, with the view of explaining
these terms, which are not familiar to many persons, I have
added in Appendix D a note on Latin versions of the Psalter.
5. Next to the Vienna Psalter, it is desirable to draw

attention to another Psalter connected with Charlemagne.
It is deposited in the Bibliotheque Nationale at Paris, to
which collection it was transferred from the Abbey of
St. Germain-des-Pres, and has for its press-mark Latin

13159. This is also a Gallican Psalter, and it is remarkable
for the evident care bestowed upon its execution and the
richness of its decoration, whichwould lead us to suppose
that it some person of distinction. The
was written for
volume is at present in a soiled and mutilated condition,

imperfect at the end with several leaves lost. Each Psalm
preceded by a Titulum/ and followed by
'
is title called
a prayer. The initial letters are large and elaborately
ornamented, more especially that of the first Psalm, which

occupies a whole page. By commencing the side of the
leaf the corresponding leaf of another Psalter, with an
initial B of Hiberno-Saxon form, has been inserted. Dr.
1
Universal Palaeography, by M. J. B. Silvestre. Translated by Sir F.
Madden. London, 1850. Vol. i.
pp. 331, 332.
io8 Documentary Evidence. [CH.
Swainson by the way, not perceiving that the latter was

inserted, mistook the B for the original initial letter of this
Psalter. In regard to the contents, the i5oth Psalm is
'
followed by the apocryphal I5ist the Pusillus eram.'
The usual Old Testament Canticles then commence but ;
these are imperfect at present, owing to the loss of some
probably two leaves. This is evident, inasmuch as at the

bottom of the verso side of one folio appear the words
quia non which are found
'
in fortitudinem roborabitur vir/
in theSong of Hannah, the third in order of the Canticles ;
and the commencing words on the next page 198 recto

are 'quomodo persequetur unus mille' from the Song of
Moses in Deuteronomy, which is always the last in order.
After this come the Benedicite, the Benedictus entitled
'
Canticum Zacharie Prophete,' the Magnificat entitled
'
Hymnum Sanctae Mariae,' the Nunc dimittis headed ' Huic

loco Simeon,' and then the Te Deum without a title. The
imperfect, ending with the words Te glo-
'
last-named is
'
riosus apostolorum chorus in the last line of f. 1 60, verso.
The commencing words on the next page f. 161, recto
'
are those of the Constantinopolitan Creed, Deum de Deo '
and at the termination of this Creed, on the verso side of the

same leaf, the Quicunque commences without a title. This
leaf, it should be noticed, is written in a different hand
from almost all the rest of the volume ;
for it appears in
one other place only in a prayer on f. So that here
28.
again two of the original leaves would seem to be

missing, one for which 161 was apparently inserted as
f.
a substitute, and another containing the matter clearly

omitted,viz. the greater
part of the Te Deum and the
commencement of the Constantinopolitan Creed, possibly
also the Apostles' Creed and the Gloria in excelsis. But
why only one leaf was inserted to supply the place of
those which had been lost is a difficulty which cannot now

be solved. Certain it is that the commencement of the
Athanasian Creed, which is written on the verso side of
this leaf as far as the words nee tres inmensi,' must have '
been in the volume originally, because the Creed is con-

tinued on the next folio in the original hand, and this hand
is maintained to the end of the MS. The initial word
' '
Finit of the Rubric at the conclusion of the Creed is
alone legible at present, the rest being obliterated by rough

and careless usage. Then follow several Litanies, which
require special notice, as they supply indisputable evidence
of the date of this Psalter. The first of these commences :
'
Christus vincit, Christus regnat, Christus imperat ;
III.
Exaudi Christe. Leoni summo pontifici et universali pap

vita. Salvator mundi, Tu ilium adiuva ;
Sancte Petre,
Tu ilium adiuva.' And after similar invocations addressed
to SS. Paul, Andrew, Clement, and another, it continues :
'
Exaudi Christe, Carolo excellentissimo . . . es (sic] a do
coro atque magno et pacifico regi Francorum et
(sic) . . .
Longobardorum ac patricio Romanorum Vita et victoria ;
Redemptor mundi, Tu ilium adiuva,' &c. Then after

similar invocations of saints and angels we have :
'
Exaudi
Christe, nobilissime proli regali vita. Sancta virgo vir-
ginum, Tu illam adiuva.' Then after more invocations

occurs :
'
Exaudi Christe, Omnibus iudicibus vel cuncto
exercitui Francorum Vita et victoria.' Again, we have
towards the end :
'
Christus vincit, Christus regnat,
Christus imperat ;
Rex regum Christus vincit.' The end
Christe, Te rogamus. Kurie eleison, Te
'
is as follows :
rogamus. Feliciter Feliciter. Tempera bona habeas (szc),
Te rogamus multos Amen.' By the above petitions

annos.
the date of this national Frank Litany, in which the notes
of jubilant exultation are mingled with those of supplica-
no Documentary Evidence. [CH.
tion, seems clearly determined to the period between the

accession of Leo III to the pontificate at the close of the
year 795 and the coronation of Charlemagne as Emperor

Charles is prayed for as Rex
'
at Christmas, A. D. 800.
Francorum et Longobardorum ac patricius Romanorum/
the usually applied to Charlemagne from the time of
title
his conquest of Lombardy in 774 until his coronation as
Emperor, after which he was commonly designated as

Imperator Romanorum.' And if Charle-
' ' '
Augustus or
magne the king here prayed for, Leo III must be the
is
Pope. What other King Charles and Pope Leo could be in-
tended ? It is true that Leo IV (who was Pope from 847
to 855) and Charles the Bald were contemporaries, but the
latter was never called and never was king of the Lombards
and Patrician of the Romans. What confirms the con-
clusion that this Litany was composed before the accession
of Charlemagne to the imperial dignity is the petition
added for the royal family Exaudi Christe, nobilissime
:
'
' '
proli regali vita.' It should be noticed that Carolo is
the last word in the third line from the bottom on the
(f. 163), and

recto side of the leaf a great portion of the
two the page, comprising no doubt originally
last lines of
some complimentary epithets or titles, has been obliterated

'
by excessive wear. The words dd coro

'
es (sic] a clearly
for
'
coronato
'
looked to me like a conjectural attempt to

retrace some of the lost portion, and between them and
' '
excellentissimo at the beginning of the last line but one
' '
on one side and atque magno at et pacifico (which come

the end of the last line) on the other there is a blank space.
Then in the first line on the reverse of the leaf follow
'
immediately, written distinctly in the original hand, regi

Francorum et Longobardorum ac patricio Romanorum.'
What were the obliterated epithets or titles it is impossible
in.] Manuscript Copies. in
now to ascertain ;
but
very improbable that augusto'
it is
'
' '
'
or imperatori should have been among them, as patri-
cius Romanorum '
is never found associated with either of
' ' 5
the titles augustus or

'
imperator, and seems to have

been supplanted by them when Charlemagne received the
imperial dignity. And if thisLitany belongs to the period
between the accession of Leo III to the popedom and the
coronation of Charlemagne as emperor, such must be the
Not improbably the Psalter was
date also of the Psalter.
written specially with a view to this Litany, which seems
to have been composed for the purpose of imploring the
Divine favour upon Charles the Great while celebrating
his victories.
The above conclusion in regard to the date of the MS.

is confirmed by the two other Litanies immediately suc-
ceeding, both of which contain petitions for Pope Leo and
King Charles. The first of the two, entitled apparently
'
Letania Falilla,' has the following :
'
Ut domnum apostolicnm Leonem in sanctitate et religione conservare
digneris, Te rogamus, audi nos :
Ut ei vitam et sanitatem dones, Te rogamus.

Ut domnum Carolum regem conservare digneris, Te rogamus :
Ut ei vitam et sanitatem atque victoriam dones, Te rogamus.

Ut proles regales conservare digneris, Te rogamus ;
Ut eis vitam et sanitatem dones, Te rogamus.'
The other, entitled apparently 'Letania Callica,' and in-
tended, it would seem, for use in a school or college, has :
1
'
Exaudi Deus. RP. Leoni pape vita.
Exaudi Christe. RP. Carolo regi vita.
Exaudi Deus pro liberis regalibus vita.
Exaudi Christe exercitui Francorum vita.'
The Litanies are followed by some reference to the

Authentic and Plagal musical tones or modes, described as
Autentiis Protus, Plai Prottis, Anientus Dcuterus, Plat
1 '
i. e. Responsum."
ii2 Documentary Evidence. [CH.
Deuterus, &c. Then on the last leaf is a '
Hymnum die
dominico,' commencing
'
Deus qui
luminis satorque caeli
lucis,' and on the verso side near the bottom of the page
'
occurs, Hymnum ad prima. Post matutinis. Laudibus quos

trinitate psallamus psallamus rursus admonet pater verus
familias.' The hymn is not concluded, so that the volume
is obviously imperfect at the end owing to mutilation.
It must be added that M. Delisle, the learned Director
of the National Library at Paris, places this MS. between
795 and 800 accepting the date clearly indicated by

l
internal evidence . The codex, important as it is in relation
to the history of the Athanasian Creed, was unknown to

Waterland. A collation of the text of that Creed, which
is contained in it, will be found in the Appendix.
6. Another Paris MS. Bibliotheque Natioriale, Latin
4858 contains on the verso side of the last leaf a fragment
of the Athanasian Creed, the portion from the beginning
'
to the words tres aeterni of the eleventh verse inclusive.

'
This follows without any title the Chronicon of Eusebius,

as translatedby Jerome, which is the only other document
comprised The cause of the Creed appear-
in the volume.
ing in this
fragmentary condition is obviously
nothing but
the mutilation of the MS., which originally must in all
probability have contained the whole of the formulary.
Beyond this it is necessarily impossible to form even

a conjecture in regard to the contents of the last leaves.
This is one of the MSS. noticed by Montfaucon in
his Diatribe in Symbolum Quicttnque, and he ascribes
it without hesitation to the same epoch as the Vienna
Psalter already mentioned belongs to in his judgement
the close of the eighth century 2 The old printed catalogue .
1
See Swainson, Nicene and Apostles' Creeds, &c., p. 354.
2
Regius codex num. 4908, annorum nongentorum nullum habet titulum
attributes but doubtfully, to the ninth century

it, Nono :
'
saeculo exaratus videtur.' But the present authorities agree

with Montfaucon as to the date. We may therefore safely
accept the verdict of that experienced palaeographer.
A collation of the text will be found in Appendix E.
7. The Athanasian Creed appears in manuscript collections
of canons as well as psalters. My first instance under this
head is from a MS. comprising a Gallican collection of
canons, assigned by Professor Maassen in his Bibliotheca
Latino, iitris canonici to the ninth century, but probably
written, as we shall shortly see, at its commencement. This

is MS., Bibliotheque Nationale, Lat. 1451.
also a Paris
It begins with a tree of consanguinity. Then comes
a notice of the first six Oecumenical Councils. Then on
f. 6, verso, a list of the popes is commenced, headed with
the title :
'
Hie sunt Pontifices sancte Romanae Ecclesiae
5
Beati Petri apostoli. The duration of each pontificate is
specified in years, months, and days : and the first five are
PetniSj Linus, Cletus, Clemens, and Aneclitus. The list
is concluded on f.
7, verso, the last being: 'XCVII.
Adrianus s. an. XXIII. m. X. d. XVII.'; or in full:
'
Adrianus sedit annos XXIII. menses X. dies xvil.' This
was Adrian I, who died on Christmas Day, A. D. 795.
Between this and the next line there has been inserted in
another hand the following :

'
XCVIII. Leo papa.' That
this insertion was made after the completion of the codex
is evident from the fact of its being thrust in between the
lines. And it must have been made before the death of
Leo III, the successor of Adrian I, which took place
niillumqne auctions nomen. Aequalis ipsi est, qui memoratur a Lambecio

exstatque in Bibliotheca Caesarea Caroli Magni iussu conscriptns, cnius titulus
sic habet, Fides Sancti Athanasii efiscopi Alexandrini! Montfaucon,
Diatribe in the Appendix to his edition of Athanasius, published at Paris,
St.
A. D. 1698. This MS. was numbered 4908 in the old Royal Library of France.
I
ii4 Dociimentary Evidence. [CH.
A. D. 816 : had it been made after, the duration of his
pontificate would have been specified in all probability,

as has been done in the case of Adrian and all the other
popes on the list. Thus we are led to believe that the

MS. was not written later than the year 816; that it was
not executed prior to the death of Adrian is obvious from
the length of his occupation of the Papal See being stated
to a day.
The of popes
list is immediately followed by some
chronological notes :
'
Ab exordio mundi usque ad diluvium sunt anni duo milia CCXL. et II.
A diluvio usque ad nativitatem Abrahe sunt anni DCCCCXLli.

Passum autem domimim nostrum lesum Christum peractis (sic) ab ortu
mundi quinque milia CCXX. et vnr. anni.
A passione domini nostri lesu Christi usque ad sedem beatissimi Marcellini
pape Romae anni CCLXXVI. menses vim.
De apostolato iam facto Christi martyris Marcellini usque tempus glorio-
sissimi domni Caroli regis XXV. anni regni eius hoc est usque VIII. Kalendas
Apriles sunt anni ccccxc. et menses III.'
At thought that these notes determined the date

first I
of the MS., but on further consideration it appears to me

that they cannot be taken as proving more than the
negative conclusion that it was not written before the

epoch indicated by them, which seems to be the eighth of
the Kalends of April or the twenty-fifth of March in the
year 796, not, as Maassen states, 793. Apparently Maassen,

in accordance with the usual computation, placed the
commencement of Charlemagne's reign in October 768,
when upon the death of his father he succeeded to the
kingdom in conjunction with his brother Carloman. But,
in the first place, the
year 793 falls within the pontificate of
Adrian, whose death is virtually recorded, as we have seen,
in the list of popes, to which these notes are subjoined :
and next, it cannot be made to synchronize with the whole

sum of the successive periods which are here stated to have
elapsed from the Creation to the date intended. Thus

5,228 years from the Creation to the Passion + 276 years
and nine months from the Passion to the Pontificate of
Marcellinus + 490 years and three months from Marcellinus
to March twenty-fifth of the twenty-fifth year of the reign
of Charlemagne = 5>995 years. And according to the
Eusebian chronology, which is followed in these notes, as it
was generally in the Middle Ages, and which placed the
Nativity of our Blessed Lord in the year 5,199 from the
Creation, the year 5995 from the Creation would coincide
not with 793 A. D. but with 796. Hence it is clear that
Charlemagne's reign is not reckoned here as commencing in

768 A. D. Is there any other computation of his reign
which will solve the difficulty? Einhard in his life of
Charles relates that upon his brother Carloman's death,
with whom he had reigned conjointly, he was constituted
sole king with the consent of all the Franks 1 . This took
place in December, A. D. 771 and this the 'Poeta Saxo' in
:
his metrical life of Charles regards as the occasion when
the Frank monarchy was conferred upon him by the right

of divine authority: accordingly placed at the very
it is
commencement of his Annals of the acts of Charles 2 .
And if Charlemagne's reign is reckoned as commencing in
December 771, clearly March twenty-fifth, 796, falls within

its twenty-fifth year. We have shown that the year
1 '
Karolus fratre clefuncto consensvi omnium Francoram rex constituitur.'
Vita Caroli, sec. 3 see Migne, Patrol. Latina, torn, xcvii. p. 29.
;
2 '
Salvator nvundi, postquam de Virgine nasci
Dignatus, nostri se corporis induit artus,
Evolvit septingentos rota temporis annos,
Et decies septem, sed et unus paene peractus
Insuper annus erat, cum iure monarchia regni
Francorum Carolo divinitus est data magno.'
Poetae Saxonis Annalium de gestis Caroli Magni libri
quinque, see Migne, Patrol. Latina, torn. xcix. p. 685.

I 2
n6 Documentary Evidence. [CH.
796 A. D. harmonizes with the sum of the periods calculated

in these chronological notes from the Creation.
On the reverse of the same leaf, on the recto side of
which these notes appear, the Athanasian Creed commences,
'
introduced by the title Incipit exemplar fidei cftt scl
:
Athanasii epl Alexandrine ecclesie. 'It is concluded on the

next page, f. 8, recto. The contraction cht is clearly for
cJiatholice or chatholicae, the word being thus spelt in the
text of the Creed. The various readings are printed in
the Appendix but one of them I cannot forbear to draw
;
attention to here it is so interesting and peculiar. Verses

'
8-10 appear thus : Aeternus pater, aeternus films,
aeternus et spiritus sanctus ;
Increatus pater, increatus
films, increatus et spiritus sanctus ;

Inmensus pater,
inmensus films, inmensus et spiritus sanctus.' It will be
observed that this reading seems to receive support from
the two succeeding verses Et tamen non tres aeterni, :
'
sed unus aeternus sicut non tres increati, nee tres inmensi,
;
i
sed unus increatus, et unus inmensus.' But I have not

met with it in any other MS.
Among the other contents of this codex are the
'
Confession of Faith commonly Fides Hieronymi,' entitled
also a list of the ecclesiastical provinces of Gaul, also
a collection of canons and decretal epistles, in course of
which other confessions of faith occur the original Nicene
Creed, with anathema, necessarily included among the
its
acts of the Nicene Council, the confession most commonly

'
described as
'
Fides Romanorum or '
Fides Romanae
Ecclesiae,' another called
'
Libellus de fide catholica contra
omnes hereses Augustini,' and that commonly known as
'
Gennadius de dogmaticis ecclesiasticis,' but here, as well as
the mentioned, attributed to Augustine. The latest
last
Council contained in this collection is the Third of Toledo,

in.] Manuscript Copies. nj
A. D. 5^9, celebrated as the occasion when the Visigothic
kingdom of Spain and Gallia Narbonensis abjured Arianism

and accepted the Catholic Faith and the acts of that :
council are the last document in the volume, but it is
incomplete owing ,to the mutilation of the codex. The

latest papal epistle is by Innocent I. The collection may
therefore have been compiled at the end of the sixth
century or the beginning of the seventh. It is clearly
a Gallican collection, and the MS. must have been written
in France.
As the history of a MS. is always interesting and some-

times important, it is worth while mentioning that this
volume formerly belonged to Colbert's Library and the ;
name of an earlier owner appears at the bottom of the first
page :Fuit Nicolai Fabri.' Another memorandum on

'
the verso side of the 'first leaf, written in a hand of the

fifteenth century, points to its ancient, possibly original,
home :
'
Iste liber est sancti Petri fossatensis.' The Abbey
of St. Peter des Fosses or Fossatensis also called the
Abbey of St. Maur des Fosses, because the remains of

St. Maur were transferred to it from the Abbey of Glan-
feuil in Anjou in the time of Charles the Bald was

situated on the river Marne, at a distance of two leagues
from Paris. As it was founded in the middle of the seventh
century, the MS. may have been written within its walls.
8. Paris, Bibliotheque Nationale, No. 3848 B. of the
Latin MSS. has been previously referred to, as comprising
among its contents two discourses on the Apostles' Creed
'
preached at the
'
Traditio Symboli and the Herovall
Collection of Canons, in the first chapter of which it will
be remembered the Autun Canon enjoining the recitation
of the Athanasian Creed upon the clergy is found. This
MS. also produces in extenso the Quicunque, introducing
n8 Documentary Evidence. [CH.
it apparently among several testimonies respecting the

Faith from the Fathers between the Sermons and the
Collection. The Fathers thus quoted are St. Hilary,
St. Ambrose, St.Chrysostom, Theophilus, Cyril ofSt.
Alexandria, his epistles to Nestorius and Bishop John,
and St. Isidore of Seville, who is, it will be observed, the

latest of the number. The title of the Q^îc^mque is Fides'
sancti Athanasii episcopi.' A collation of the text will be

found in Appendix, Note E. This MS.
assigned to the is
ninth century by the Catalogue of the Paris MSS., to the
beginning of that century by Professor Maassen in his

Bibliotheca Latino, iuris canonici.
9. Psalter of the Emperor Lothair. This Psalter has on

its three leaves portraits of Lothair as the prince in
first
whose honour or at whose request it was written, of David

as the inspired author of the Psalms, and of St. Jerome by
whom the Gallican or amended version of the Latin
Psalter contained in the book was elaborated. Each of
these pictures is followed by a set of ten verses. The
third of them expressly states that the volume was executed
from a motive of deep veneration for the king, clearly
meaning Lothair, who
represented by
is his picture with
allthe circumstances of royal dignity, seated upon a throne,
wearing a crown and mantle both of gold and studded with

jewels, his right hand resting upon a staff or sceptre, his
left grasping the hilt of his sword. And the verses which
are subjoined to his picture distinctly refer to the most
remarkable epoch in his life the short-lived triumph
which by the aid of his brothers Louis and Pippin and
of a powerful party among the nobles and bishops he
achieved over his father, Louis the Meek, in the year 833.
In a national diet or assembly held at Compiegne in
October of that year, as sole Emperor or Caesar of the
ni.] Mamiscript Copies. 119
West, he received the homage of princes and people with

the assurances of their fidelity, and ambassadors from the
Eastern Emperor came to treat with him. Never after-
wards did his sovereignty extend over the vast extent of
country which at that time acknowledged his rule. The
following are the lines, in which all this is evidently alluded
to it might even be said, described:
'
Inclyta Caesareum diffundit fama triumphum x
Hlotharii, celebrat quern maximus ambitus orbis.

Hunc oriens recolit, mittens veneranter Achivos,
Qui veniam curvi poscant et foedera pacis,
Syderis occidui populi sua iura tremiscunt,

Et tanto gaudent proni se subdere regi V
It is natural to conclude that the MS. was written soon
after the events which it thus commemorates, at the end of
833 or beginning of 834, especially as the latter year,

before it was far advanced, brought with it a reverse of
fortune to Lothair. Popular favour veered round his ;
brothers, alarmed by the dimensions his power was as-
suming, changed sides his father was restored to liberty

;
and reinstated in the empire ;

the title of Emperor was
taken from him and his authority confined within the
boundaries of his own kingdom of Italy. It is not at all
likely that a Psalter designed apparently to celebrate the

triumph of Lothair, an event necessarily full of painful and
degrading memories to Louis the Meek, would have been
executed and used after the return of the latter to power
and within his dominions, nor yet at any time during the
remainder of his life, which terminated in 840.
The Psalter
itself, like the Vienna
Psalter, previously
mentioned, written in letters of gold, an indication of its

is
connexion with some royal personage and the usual ;
Canticles, which follow, are written in the same ornate

1
See Voyage litt&raire de deux Bdnddictins, vol. i.
p. 137.
style. Among these, according to the account of the
Voyage Litteraire, are the Te Deum,

the Athanasian
Creed the Lord's Prayer and Apostles' Creed, and accord-
;
ing to the account of the Palaeographical Society, the

Magnificat also. The position of the Athanasian Creed
is very unusual, coming before the Lord's Prayer and
Apostles' Creed and Magnificat: it is entitled 'Fides
Catholica tradita a sancto Athanasio Alexandrine episcopo.'
In a later hand, dating as appears from internal evidence
between A.D. 908 and 920, are prayers 'pro statu sanctae
Dei ecclesiae and others. At the beginning also written
'
in a different hand from the Psalms and Canticles on the

inside of the cover is another prayer headed
'
Oratio pro
vivorum,' which must have been used, we may judge
if
from its language, by a daughter of Lothair when an

inmate of some religious house, the names of her brothers
Lothair, Charles, and Louis being mentioned, also of
Charles the elder, probably Charles the Bald, among her
uncles, as living, and those of Lothair, Hyrmingarde, and
Theobert, as departed seemingly. As Louis of Bavaria
and Charles, the brothers of Lothair the Emperor, died,
the former in 876 and the latter in 877, we have here
a clue to the date of this prayer. It supplies obviously an
additional indication of the connexion of the volume with
Lothair.
This MS. belonged formerly to the Abbey of St. Hubert
in the Forest of Ardennes and Diocese of Liege and in ;
Abbey, known
'
a Chronicle of the as the Cantatorium,' of
the twelfth century, is described as having been presented
to it by Louis le Debonnaire or the Meek, on occasion of
the translation of St. Hubert's remains, A.D. 825. Ac-
cordingly, this date hasbeen assigned to the codex, though
doubtfully, by the Palaeographical Society. But the state-
ment of the Chronicle can only be regarded as legendary,

if the encomiastic verses refer,as they clearly do, to events
which occurred in
833 ;
nor does it appear likely that
a Psalter, in which Lothair is represented as the sole
reigning Emperor, would have been compiled at a time

when he was merely associated with his father in the
imperial dignity. the fact of such a tradition existing

Still
in the twelfth century proves that even then the Psalter
had been the property of St. Hubert's Abbey for a con-
siderable period. It may have been written there. When

the two French Benedictines, Martene and Durand, in the
course of their literary journey visited the abbey in 171$,
they found it still there and in the delightful narrative of

;
their travels they describe most precious among

it as the
the manuscript treasures of the abbey, and give an account
of it, together with copies of the portrait of Lothair and of
several of the documents which it contains, among them
1
the verses which accompany the pictures . The Psalter
remained in its ancient home till the French Revolution of
the last century, when it was carried off by the Prior, Dom
Nicholas Spirlet, and Dom Etienne, together with other
treasures of their house. The Prior died on his journey,
and Dom Etienne then became possessor of the volume,
which he bequeathed to his nephew, of whom it was
purchased in or about the year 1875 by Messrs. Ellis and
White of New Bond Street. By this firm it was sold to
a gentleman who did not wish his name to be known.
Thus this valuable and interesting MS., though still extant,
is lost to the public and it cannot but be a subject of

;
regret that the Trustees of the British Museum were

unable to secure it for the nation. The Palaeographical
Society have however rescued it from total oblivion by
1
Voyage litttraire de deux religieux Benedictins, vol. i.
pp. 135-144.
publishing it may be presumed through the courtesy of

Messrs. Ellis and White two facsimiles of the hand-
writing, and another of the portrait of Lothair, with some

1
account of the codex .
Waterland was unacquainted with this Psalter, which is
of real importance in relation to the history of the Athana-

sian Creed, his book being written before the publication
of the Voyage Litter aire.
10. The Psalter commonly described in England of
late years as the Utrecht Psalter calls for some notice.
For in the though not written in the same
first place,
costly style as the Lothair and Vienna Psalters, it is still
remarkable for the care and labour evidently employed in
its execution and decoration, the body of the text both in
the Psalms and Canticles being written in rustic capitals,
in this respect I think I may say it is unique among extant
manuscript Psalters, and the Psalms and Canticles being

all preceded by illustrative drawings of a peculiar char-
acter. And its
history is remarkable in connexion with
the modern controversies relating to the Athanasian Creed.
Archbishop Ussher in the preface to his work De Symbolo,

published in 1647, mentions that he had seen the MS. in
the Cotton Library, that it contained the Athanasian Creed
and the Apostles', the latter having as many articles as in
modern times and he judged it, both from the ancient
;
character of the drawings and the somewhat large form of

2
the letters, to be not later than the time of Gregory 1 .
1
Palaeographical Society, Facsimiles of Manuscripts, vol. ii. Plates, 69,
93- 94-
2
'Latino-Gallicum illud Psalterium in Bibliotheca Cottoniana vidimus:
sicnt et alia Latina duo longe maioris antiqnitatis; in quibus praeter hymnum
hunc (sc. Te Deum) nomine Hymni ad Matutinas titulo
sine ullo authoris
inscriptum, et Athanasianum habebatur Symbolum, et Apostolicum, totidem

omnino quot hodiernum nostrum continens capitula. In priore, quod
And since Ussher's time this Psalter has frequently been
appealed to by the learned proof of the antiquity of the

in
Quicunque. But it disappeared mysteriously from the

Cotton Library. Waterland says that in his time it was
not there, and speaks of it as lost 1 It appears to have .
been lent to the Earl of Arundel between the years 1625

and 1631, and not to have been returned at the latter date.
Nothing more was heard of it until it transpired not many
years since that it was in the Utrecht Library, to which it
had been presented by one Ridler in 1718. Professor
Westwood saw it there and examined it carefully in 1858.
Public attention was invited to it by the late Professor
Swainson 1872, in when the controversy respecting the

retention of the Athanasian Creed in the Church of Eng-
land was raging ;
and its reappearance on the arena was
the occasion of eliciting a most noteworthy diversity
of opinion among palaeographers in regard to the date
when it was written. Sir Thomas Duffus Hardy, an
experienced palaeographer and antiquarian, in a report

drawn up at the request of Lord Romilly, then Master of
the Rolls, confidently maintained, in agreement with Ussher,
that the volume belonged to the sixth century, and he
adduced two other authorities, Haenel and Baron von
Westreenen, support of his position
in
2
To counteract this, .
Dean Stanley produced a formidable array of opinions in

favour of a much later date from other palaeographers, who
were also men of the highest eminence in their particular
Gregorii I. tempore non fuisse recentius, turn ex antique picturae genere
colligitur, turn ex literarum forma grandiuscula, Athanasianum quidem fidei

1
Catholicae . . . alterum vero Symbol! Apostolorum praefert titulum. Ussher, de
Symbolo, Praef. p. 4.
1
History of the Athanasian Creed. Oxford, 1870, pp. 68, 71.
2
The Athanasian Creed in connexion with the Utrecht Psalter, a Report by
Sir T. D. Hardy.
line. Mr. Bond, then Keeper of the Manuscripts in the
British Museum, considered 'it impossible to refer the

Psalter to an earlier time than the end of the eighth cen-
tury,' more disposed to assign it to the ninth.'

and was {
Sir E. M. Thompson, at the time Assistant Keeper of the

l
Manuscripts in the British Museum, could not assign it
to an earlier age than the close of the eighth century.'
The Rev. H. O. Coxe, Bodleian Librarian, saw
'
no reason
to conclude that the MS. was written before the com-
mencement of the ninth century.' The Rev. S. S. Lewis,
'
Librarian of Corpus Christi College, Cambridge, did not
feel warranted in assigning it to an earlier date than
the ninth century.' Sir Digby Wyatt felt strongly that

the Psalter
'
was probably done at or about the middle of
the eighth century.' Professor West wood of Oxford re-
ferred it 'to the eighth or ninth century 1 Lastly, the .'
Utrecht Librarian placed the MS. between A.D. 750 and

A.D. 850. In the face of this preponderance of palaeo-
graphical authority it is impossible any

longer to maintain
that the Psalter possesses the high antiquity which Ussher
attributed to it. And yet if we turn for guidance to the
advocates of a later date, their opinions take such a wide
range and differ so much that it is difficult to base any
definite conclusion upon them. The most definite con-
clusion we can arrive at seems to be that the Psalter was
written either in the eighth or ninth century, and most
probably belongs to the first half of the latter.

Nothing certain appears to be known of the history
of this MS. prior to its coming into the possession of Sir
Robert Cotton. It has been supposed to have been
brought by Bertha, the wife of Êthelbert, King of Kent,
1
7 he Utrecht Psalter, Reports on the age of the Manuscript, with a preface
by A. P. Stanley, Dean of Westminster.
from France, and by her to have been bequeathed to the

monastery of Reculver. and thence removed to Canter-
bury. But the evidence for this is of the frailest possible
description. Sir E. M. Thompson however is of opinion
that it was probably written in the north-east of France.
And this receives some confirmation from the fact that the
Psalter- is of the Gallican version.
The Athanasian Creed occurs in the usual place. After
the six usual Old. Testament Canticles follow the Bene-
dicite, the Te Deum entitled
'
Hymnum ad matutinis,' the

Benedictus entitled '
Canticum Zacharie Prophete ad Ma-
tutinum,' the Magnificat, the Nunc dimittis entitled
'
Canticum Simeonis ad Completorium,' the Gloria in ex-
celsis without any title, the Lord's Prayer according to
St. Matthew but without the Doxology, the Apostles'
Creed entitled '
Symbolu (sic] Apostolorum,' the mark

of abbreviation over the Symbohun being probably
it in
omitted through inadvertence, and the Athanasian Creed

' '
entitled Fides Catholicam (sic] and then comes the ;
apocryphal i5ist Psalm a very peculiar arrangement, as

it usually follows the iôth Psalm. It is observable that
the Canticles here are the same, and in the same order, as
in the Vienna Psalter previously noticed, except that the
Gloria in excelsis is omitted by the latter from the Can-
ticlesand placed among the preliminary documents at the

beginning. A collation of the text will be found in the
Appendix.
ii. The Cotton MS. Galba A. xviii, generally known as
King ./Ethelstan's Psalter, is a very interesting book and ;
Sir E. M. Thompson's account of it has thrown a flood

1
of light upon its construction and history . This is my
1
Catalognc of Ancient Manuscripts in the British Museum, by E. M.
Thompson, Part ii. Latin, p. 12.
authority for the dates to which the several parts of the

codex may be assigned.
The MS. originally comprised the Psalter and Canticles
only, including of course the Lord's Prayer and Creeds,
with a few prefatory documents, and was written on the
Continent, probably in Germany, in the ninth century, in
Caroline minuscules. That this part was written abroad and
in the ninth century is shown not only by the character of
the handwriting, but also by the fact that on a leaf at the
beginning, what was a flyleaf of the original volume, are

noted the obits of ' Karolus piissimus imperator,' Pip-
'
pinus gloriosus rex,' 'Bernhardus gloriosissimus rex,'

'
Uvoradus dux/ and Himildruda comitissa,' followed by
'
a direction for the due celebration of their memories and

a prayer for their eternal rest. Charlemagne died A.D.
814 ; son, King of Italy and of Bavaria and
Pippin his
part of Germany, in 81o Bernhard, who succeded to the
;
dominions of his father Pippin, in 817; Uvoradus was

'
'
comes under Charlemagne, and shared with two
palatii
others the command of an army sent to quell an insurrec-
tion of Saxons A.D. 783 1 Himildruda was a concubine
.
of the same monarch 2 and it is not probable that either

;
of the two last-named persons survived Charlemagne long,

as he attained to the full age of man possibly both died :
before him. Hence we may infer that the MS. was not
written later than A.D. 850, as it is not likely that the
direction for the solemn observance of the anniversaries of
the deaths of the great Emperor, his royal son and grand-
son, his courtier, and his concubine would have been issued
many years after their decease. The Psalter is Gallican and

is marked with obeli and asterisks. The usual Old Testa-
1
Einhardi Annales, apud Pertz, vol. i. p. 163.
2 Annales Laureshamienses apud Pertz, vol. i. p. 35.
,
ment Canticles are followed by the Benedicite, Benedictus,

Magnificat, Nunc dimittis, Te Deum, Gloria in excelsis en-
'
titled Hymnus dominica ad matutinas,' the Lord's
in die
Prayer, the Apostles' Creed entitled Symbolum,' and the

'
Athanasian entitled 'Fides sancti Athanasii Alexandrini.'

Professor Westwood in his account of this MS. in his
Palaeog'raphia Sacra appears to agree with Sir E. M.
Thompson with respect to the date of the Psalter with its
prefatory matter and Canticles and the locality which
produced them. The Canticles here, it may be observed,
are the same as in the Utrecht Psalter.
To the MS. as thus originally constituted were added,
both at the beginning and end, '
on the spare leaves and on
supplemental leaves V some prayers ;
and these additions,
being in Caroline writing, must have been made on the
Continent in the same place no doubt, probably a monas-
tery, where the book was written and first used. After
this the volume must have been transmitted to England,
where apparently it received yet further additions both at
the beginning and end. For at the present day it com-
mences and this seems to have been the case in Sir
Robert Cotton's time also with a calendar, followed by
rules for calculating the seasons, this part being written in
an English hand of the tenth century, and immediately
preceding the first set of prayers in Caroline writing. And
it concludes with some prayers intended to be used with
the Psalms and the following documents in Greek, but

written in Latin characters, viz. a Litany, the Lord's
Prayer, the Apostles' Creed, and the Ter-sanctus. This
part, like that at the commencement, is in an Anglo-
Saxon hand of the tenth century, and it immediately
follows the second set of prayers in Caroline writing. All
1
Thompson, u. s.
i28 Dociimentary Evidence. [CH.
this isvery curious and interesting. The Apostles' Creed,

It has been
as it appears here, is of a very ancient type.
printed by Dr. Heurtley in his Harmonia Symbolica.
Two particulars remain to be noticed respecting the
Calendar and the rules subjoined to it. That the Calendar
was written in the tenth century, not earlier, is clear not
only from the character of the writing, but from the fact
of its containing the obit of King Alfred, who died A.D.

900. 'Aelfred rex obiit septenis et quoque amandus.'
'
King Aelfred, a man likewise to be loved, died on the

seventh of the Calends of November.' Next, the mention
of the year 703 in the Appendix, so to call it, to the
Calendar was for some time regarded as a proof that the
whole MS. was written at that date 1
;
and it has been
a subject of some perplexity, since that position was proved
to be untenable by the discovery of King Alfred's obit in
the Calendar. But the solution of the difficulty is simple
and obvious. The date occurs in a rule given for finding
the year A.D. from the Indictions, which is as follows :
.'Si vis nosse quot sint anni ab Incarnatione Domini, scito
quot fuerint ordines indictionum, ut puta, V. anno Tyberii

cesaris ems XLVI. hos per XV. multiplica fiunt DCXC. adde
semper regulares XII. quia IIII. indictionum secundum
Dionissium dominus natus est, indictionem quoque cuius
volueris ut puta in presenti .1. fiunt DCCIII. isti sunt anni
nativitatis domini.' It obvious that the date A. D. 703
is
here mentioned is simply the date when the rule was

drawn up, being adduced by the author for the purpose
of illustration. It proves nothing in regard to the epoch
1 This was Archbishop Ussher's view ;

and in a list of contents written on the
verso-side of the fly-leaf of the MS. the first note is :
'
Calendarium vetustis-
simum literis Saxonicis cum ciclis ecclesiasticis. Scriptum fuit anno 703, ut
apparet in codice."
at which the volume was executed, beyond the fact that

the part in which it appears could not have been written
earlier. This rule is found word for word at the com-
mencement of the fourteenth chapter of Bede's work De
Temporibus, and a few more of the rules contained in our
codex are subjoined, slightly abbreviated, which would lead
us to suppose that the whole set was probably from his
hand. It seems clear from the last chapter (de sexta aetate]
of that work that it was written, or at any rate concluded,
in the year 708 of our era, for it begins with the statement
number of years of the sixth age were then past *
that that ;
and Bede himself dates the commencement of the sixth

z
age from the Nativity of our Lord It is remarkable that .
the appearance of this rule for finding the jrear A. D. in

this work of Bede's should have escaped notice hitherto.
Cotton's ownership of the book is attested by his .auto-
graph on the fly-leaf: Robertus Cotton Bruceus 1612.'

'
It appears again at the bottom of f. 3 r. The fly-leaf also

'
contains the record of an earlier ownership Psalterium :
regis Ethelstani emptum per Dominum Thomam, Rectorem

de Colbrok, Wynton, 1542.' Sir E. M. Thompson says
that Thomas Dakcombe, Rector of St. Mary's Colbrok,
Winchester, was also Minor Canon of the cathedral. The

church of St. Mary Colbrok has I believe perished, and
the parish is absorbed in that of St. Maurice. And with
regard to the connexion of the book with King Êthelstan,
it described as having been once his property in the
is
table of contents, which is written on the verso side of the
fly-leaf of the MS., and which Sir E. M. Thompson

apparently regards as authorized, if not drawn up, by
Cotton: 'Liber fuit quondam Êthelstani Regis.' Again,
1 '
Sexta aetas continet annos praeteritos DCCViil.'
2
Liber de TemporHnts, cap. xvi.
K
on the back of another earlier miniature f. 2, of this volume

has been pasted, probably by Sir R. Cotton, a miniature
executed at the end of the fifteenth century, and on this
was inscribed in gilt letters, now all but illegible, the
title,
'
Psalterium Êthelstani regis.' These memoranda
are our only authorities for the belief that the book be-
longed at one time to King Êthelstan. Whether in
regard to this Cotton simply followed Dakcombe, or not,

must be uncertain. He may not, he may have had some
other evidence before him. He was not in all respects
a good preserver of the ancient character of the manuscripts
which he collected, as his habit of putting them in new
bindings necessarily involved sometimes the destruction
of the old covers, perhaps also the cutting away of leaves ;
and thus indications and traces and records of their early

history would be Then
the earlier purchaser, the
lost.
Rector of Colbrok, must have had some grounds for de-

scribing the book as the Psalter of King Êthelstan. What
were they ? Looking to the date of his purchase and to
the of his being a clergyman of Winchester, it is
fact
natural to suppose that the book had been the property

of one of the recently dissolved abbeys in that ancient,
royal, Saxon capital, that in describing it as he did he

was but re-echoing the title by which it had been known
in its former home, and that this title was based upon the
memory, preserved in the traditions and written records

of the society, of itsbeing originally the gift of Êthelstan.
True this is all conjecture, but I trust legitimate and
probable M. Thompson thinks that
conjecture. Sir E.
this Psalter may have been sent by Otho the Great as
a present to Êthelstan, whose sister he married, and that

thus it may have come into the possession of the latter
sovereign and Professor Westwood expresses himself

;
in.] Manuscript Copies, 131
more positively to this effect. Otho is known to have sent

another volume to England, which also belongs now to
the Cotton Collection.
Of course the question concerning the ownership of
Êthelstan, interesting as it
is, cannot affect in any way
the date of the MS. What should be borne in mind in

regard to with reference to our subject, is that originally
it
it consisted only of the Psalter with some preliminary

matter and the Canticles, including the Athanasian Creed,
and that this was written in the ninth century on the
Continent, probably in Germany, the rest of the volume

being written in the tenth century, partly abroad and
partly in England.
A collation of the text of the Quicunque in this MS.
will be found in Appendix^ Note E.
13. The next MS. copy of the Athanasian Creed, to
which I wish to draw attention, is found in a Vatican MS.,

Pal. 574, containing not a Psalter, but a collection of
canons. This codex is assigned by Reifferscheid to the
ninth century 1 ;
and so also it is dated in the authorized
2
catalogue of the Palatine MSS. recently issued According .
to the Ballerini, the collection of canons contained in it

is Gallican, and was compiled a little before the middle
of the sixth century. And to this are subjoined in the
same handwriting some additional documents, including in
their number the Athanasian Creed with the title written
in capital letters, 'Incipit fides catholica beati atanasi
episcopi
3
.' As this appendix contains no document of
1 '
Die .Romischen Bibliolheken,' von Dr. Aug. Reifferscheid, in Sitzungs-
bcrichte der Kaiserlichen Akademie der Wissenschaften Philosophisch-
Historische Classe, Band Ivi. pp. 493-499.
a
Codices Palatini descripti a Cardirali Pitra, recensuit Henricus Stevenson.
Rovnae, 1886.
3
De antiquis collcctionibus canomtm tractatus auctoribus Petro et Hiero-
K 2
a later date than A. D. 756, the above-mentioned learned

canonists are of opinion that it was drawn up in the eighth
century. The MS. may therefore be adduced as evidence

of the existence of the Quicunque in that century, though
not written till the ninth.
It may be worth noticing, particularly as the Ballerini
have passed it over in silence, that the document imme-
diately preceding the Athanasian Creed is a narrative of
the acts of the third Council of Aries, which was held
in or about A. D. 455, with respect to a dispute concerning
grande scandal-inn it is called which had arisen
jurisdiction
between Theodore Bishop of Friuli on the one hand, and
Faustus the Abbot and the brethren of Lerins on the other.
The Creed is followed by a Capitulare of the year 75^
respecting incestuous marriages, and the interrogations

addressed by Augustine of Canterbury to Gregory the
Great, with the answers of the latter. But the document
which is described by the Ballerini as the last in the
volume an excerpt from the Rule of St. Benedict is no
longer to be found nor could I find, when I inspected
:
the MS. in 1886, the note 'codex S. Nazarii in Laurissa'
which, according to the same authorities, was written on

the last leaf. In fact it is evident on examination that
since the time of the Ballerini one or more leaves at the
end have been wantonly cut away a striking proof, but
I am afraid not a solitary one, how the destruction of
ancient documents is continually going on even in large

libraries. My chief reason for making mention of this
lost note is that it throws light on the earlier history of

the MS., showing that it was once the
property of the
nymo fratribus Balleriniis, pars ii.

cap. x. in Galland's De vetustis canomun
collectionilms dissertatiomim sylloge, torn, i ; also in Migne, Patrol. Latina,
torn. Ivi.
monastery of St. Nazaire at Lorsch or Lauresham in the
diocese of Worms
a monastery which is said to have
been unsurpassed as regards the wealth of its manuscripts
by any religious house in Germany. Many of these trea-
sures, our codex no doubt among them, went to enrich
the Palatine Library at Heidelberg, which was transferred
to the .Vatican in 1623, being presented by Maximilian
Duke of Bavaria to Pope Gregory XV.
The various readings of the Athanasian Creed in this MS.,
which are very notable, will be found in Appendix, Note E.
13. Denis, in his catalogue of MSS. in the Imperial
Library at Vienna, gives an elaborate account of a MS.
of the ninth century, containing a dogmatic treatise by
Isidore of Seville, and three Confessions of Faith, including
the Athanasian Creed 1
. It is numbered 269. The volume
commences with Isidore's work addressed to Florentina
his sister, in two books. This is followed by the title,
'
Incipit deinde (sic] catholica Athanasi.' Denis suggests

that deinde is an error for de fide but possibly the copyist \
may have omitted the word fides inadvertently. Then

comes, preceded by a short introduction, the original Nicene
Creed, and then a Confession of Faith sometimes, as in
the Paris MSS.
2341 and 2076, entitled 'Fides sancti
Ambrosii episcopi,' but in Paris 3836, the same manuscript
which contains the Treves fragment of a discourse based
on the Quicunque, simply headed de fide catholica.' Here '
it has no title. It is as follows :

'
Nos patrem et filium et
spiritum sanctum unum Deum confitemur. Ita in trinitate
perfecta, ut et plenitude divinitatis sit et unitas potestatis.

Nam tres Deos dicit, qui divinitatem separat. Trinitas
Pater Deus et Filius Deus et Spirit us Sanctus Deus, et
1
Denis, Codices manuscripti theologici Bibliothccac Palatinae I 'ind
Vindobouae, 1793, vol. i.

part i. pp. 962-966.
tres imum Tres itaque personae, sed una potestas.

sunt.
Ergo diversitas plures facit. Unitas potestatis excludit

numeri quantitatem. Quia unitas numerus non est. Sic
itaque unus Deus, una fides, unum baptisma. Si quis vero
hanc fidem non habet, catholicus non potest dici. Qui
catholicam non tenet fidem, alienus est, profanus est, contra
veritatem rebellis est.' Immediately after this comes the
Athanasian Creed, likewise without title ;
and that is
succeeded by the commentary upon it, commonly attributed

to Venantius Fortunatus, in this case, like the preceding
documents, having no title. It is incomplete, ending with

'
the words of the nineteenth verse, veritate compellimur.'
The only other document is a brief tractate concerning the
fourfold meaning of Holy Scripture.
Denis adds the following note, which is
interesting in
{
reference to the earlier ownership of the manuscript : Fol. 2.
p. i orae inferior! adscriptum : Liber Hegen ecclesie. Hege-

nense Collegium Can. Reg. initia sumsit circa an. 1135,
Hegenekense Coenobium O. Cist, in Hassia fortasse anti-
quius fuit. Utriusque tamen aetatem praestans hie codex,
ut dictum, longe excedit.'
14. In the Bibliotheque Nationale at Paris is a costly
Psalter, written for Charles the Bald when king by one

Luithard, whose name recorded in a verse upon the last
is
page. It belonged for a long time to the Dean and Chapter

of Metz, and was presented by them in the year 1674 to
the minister Colbert, whose library passed eventually to
the Bibliotheque Royale. The date of the volume is
determined by the petitions in the Litany, which follows
the Canticles and Creed. Charles prays :
'
Ut mihi Karolo a te coronato vitam et prosperitatem et victoriam daues :
Ut Hirmindrudim coniugem nostram conservare digneris :
Ut liberos nostros conservare digneris.'

As Charles married Hirmindrudis in 842, and she died in
869, it is clear from the petition that she might be spared

to him that the MS. could not have been written earlier
than the former year, nor subsequent to the latter. Silvestre

considers the petition for his children a formula rather than
an expression of date ; but if it is interpreted literally, we
gather -from it that the MS. could not have been written
before 846, when Charles' eldest son, Louis le Begue, was
1
born .
The Athanasian Creed occurs in this Psalter in the usual

'
position at the end of the Canticles, and is entitled Fides

sancti Athanasii.'
Another French Psalter, written later in the ninth
15.
century, and a book of some importance in reference to

its contents as well as the evident care bestowed on its
execution, preserved the Parker Library at Corpus

is in
Christi College, Cambridge, the press mark being 272. O. 5.

On the top of the first folio is a note in a modern hand :
'hie codex scriptus temporibus Marini et Carlomanni a

Dm 885 ut infra in Litania.' There is some prefatory
matter, which is not uncommonly found in Psalters, as in
two already mentioned the Psalter of Charlemagne at

Vienna, and the yEthelstan Psalter, viz. the document
Origo prophetiae David regis/ and commencing
'
entitled
'
David filius lesse.' the preface of St. Jerome to the
'
corrected or Gallican Psalter commencing Psalterium
Romae dudum,' and the preface to the Psalter, sometimes
ascribed to St. Augustine, but really Rufinus' translation
of St. Basil's preface commencing Canticum psalmorum '
animas decorat.' The Psalter is of the Gallican version.

At the end of the i5oth Psalm the following appears in
1
See Universal Palaeography by M. J. B. Silvestre, translated and edited
by Sir F. Madden, vol. i. pp. 339-341.
136 Documentary Evidence. .
[CH.
gold uncials: 'Achadeus misericordia dei comes hunc

psalterium scribere iussit.' This occurs on the recto side
of a leaf, the verso being blank. A
long Litany, occupying
several leaves, succeeds, in which it may be noted as an
indication among the saints invoked, Remi-
of, locality that
gius, Columbanus, and Abundus are specially honoured,

their names being written in gold. Then comes the
'
apocryphal I5ist Psalm, but imperfect, beginning Pas-

cebam oves patris mei'; then successively the usual Old
Testament Canticles, the Benedicite, the Benedictus. the
Magnificat, the Nunc dimittis, the Te Deum entitled
'
Hymnum die dominico ad matutinas/ the Gloria in
excelsis 'Hymnum Angelicum/ the Athanasian

entitled
Creed entitled 'Fides Catholica,' the Lord's Prayer, and
'
the Apostles' Creed entitled Symbolum.' It will be
noticed here that the Athanasian Creed is placed before
the Lord's Prayer and Apostles' Creed, instead of after
them according to the usual order. The Canticles are fol-
lowed by a large collection of prayers, some in particular
for use at the several Hours, and by responsories to be
sung throughout the year at the various sacred seasons.

Some of the petitions in the Litany clearly denote its
date and the locality which produced it. Thus

'
Ut Marinum Apostolicum in sancta religione conservare cligneris:
Ut Karlomannum regem in perpetua prosperitate conservare digneris :
Ut Folconem episcopum cum omni grege sibi commisso in tuo apostolico

servitio conservare cligneris.'
Marinus died on January 18, 884, having occupied the

1
papal throne a year and twenty days Caiioman, son of .
Louis II, or the Stammerer, became King of Aquitania and

part of Burgundy in 880, and sole King of France on the
1
Nolitialiisiorica, apudMansi, quoted by Migne, Patrol. Latina, torn, cxxvi.
p. 966.
death of his brother Louis in 882. He died in 884 of

a wound received in hunting. Fulco, or Folco, became
Bishop or rather Archbishop of Rheims in succession to
Hincmar, who died in December, 882. Hence the Litany
must have been written in the diocese of Rheims and in
the year 883. And hence it would follow that the Psalter
also belongs to the same date and locality, were it certain
that the Litany was part of the same volume as the Psalter
originally. But it is not so. The Litany, coming as it
does between the i5oth Psalm and the apocryphal I5ist,

which almost always follows immediately, is apparently an
insertion, thenormal position for the Litany being after
the Canticles, including of course the Creed or Creeds.
And what supports this view, is that the leaf containing
the initial B of the first Psalm is an insertion, as the
Librarian, the Rev. S. S. Lewis, pointed out to me. The
I5ist Psalm too is imperfect at the commencement, from
which it be inferred that a leaf bearing the title and
may
initial words has been extracted to make way for the
Litany. The handwriting also is smaller here than in
the leaves immediately preceding and succeeding. Still
the handwriting of the Litany corresponds in character

with that of the book generally, and the resemblance is
particularly marked in the latter part containing the
orationes. Both would thus appear to have issued from
the same scriptorium and to belong to the same epoch.
Possibly the Litany was originally annexed at the end, or
was intended to be so ;
but for security was afterwards
inserted in the place which it now occupies. However this
may be, the volume itself is shown by independent evidence
to be of the same date and locality as the Litany. For

among the orationes for Compline, there is one for King
Carloman, who was sole King of France from 882 to 884,
as before mentioned Exaudi Deus Karlomanno regi vita.'

:
'
Thus the Psalter may be more accurately dated A. D. 883

than A. D. 885, the date assigned to it by the modern note
on the first folio. And the fact of the Psalter being written
by order of Count Achadeus seems to connect it with

Rheims or its neighbourhood, if, as we may reasonably
suppose, this Count Achadeus was none other than a Count
bearing the same name who, according to Flodoard, was
threatened with excommunication by Hincmar in the event
of his plundering the property of the Church of Rheims
1
.
It will be remembered that Hincmar died in December,
883. That the Psalter was used, as it was no doubt

written, in an abbey, we learn from a prayer pro abbate
nostro.
16. At Bamberg in Bavaria is a Psalter of considerable
interest, which for several reasons requires to be noticed.

It belongs to the beginning of the tenth century, having
been finished in the year 909, as appears from some verses
on fol. lib. It is a quadruple Psalter, containing the
three Latin versions of the Psalter by Jerome, viz. the
Gallican, Roman and Hebraic, and in the fourth column
the Greek of the LXX written in Latin characters. The
Canticles follow, theTe Deum coming after the Apostles'
Creed, which peculiar. The Apostles' Creed is accom-
is
panied by a Greek version, and so also is the Te Deum as

far as the words venerandum tuum.' Then a Litany, the
'
'
Gloria in excelsis entitled Hymnus Angelicus,' and the
'
1
Achadeo comiti pro rapinis, quas audiebat ab eius hominibus fieri in
ipsius comitatu, et pro villa Spantia, qua ille annonam ecclesiae Remensis
auferre disponebat, notificans ei quod, si aliquid inde raperet, tarn ipsum qnam
suos excommunicaret et alienos ab omni Christianitate faceret.' This refers to
Hincmar. Flodoardi Historiae Remensis
lib. iii. cap. 26, apud Migne,
Patrol. Latina, torn. 249. Flodoard drew the materials of his
cxxv. p.
history, Mabillon says, partly from the archives of the Church of Rheims. He
also describes it as a work of the greatest merit.
Nicene Creed entitled 'Fides catholica Niceni concilii,' these

three documents being all both in Latin and Greek. The
Athanasian Creed closes the volume and has no Greek
version, which is noteworthy. It ends with the words
'
non confusione substantiae sed,' one or more leaves being
lost. The title is
'
Fides Catholica a sancto Athanasio
'
episcopo some variant readings of the text will be found

:
in Appendix E for these, as for some other particulars

;
respecting this MS., I am indebted to the kindness of the

Rev. E. C. S. Gibson, late Principal of the Wells Theological
College.
On the modern fly-leaf of a Vatican MS., Pal. 39, a note
'
appears signed P. Martinucci/ which refers obviously to
this quadruple Psalter and throws some light upon its
history Folium 43 huius codicis est extractum ex codice
:
'
praestantissimo Bibliothecae Bambergensis in Bavaria qui

est autographus clarissimi Neugarli episcopi Constantiensis
et abbatis Gallensis. In praedicto codice Bambergensi

continetur Psalterium quadruplex quattuor columnis dis-
tinctum et in quarta columna legitur Psalterium Graecum
iuxta Latino tamen charactere conscriptum. Codex
LXX,
ex abbatia Sangallensi ab Henrico Imperatore Sancto
nuncupate Cathedrali Bambergensi donatus fuit et modo
inter cimilia eiusdem Cathedral is asservatur.' The verses
written on this inserted leaf have been printed by Blan-
1
They commence
'
chinius .
Quos sibi pontifices legit
Constantia dives, Praesul et Abba simul/ and go on to
describe the four versions of the Bamberg Psalter. Pal. 39,
it should be added, is also a Psalter, and among its con-
tents, which are very complete, is the Athanasian Creed :
it is assigned in Stevenson's catalogue to the eleventh
century, and judging from the saints commemorated in the
1
Vindidae Canonicarum Scrifhtrarwn, Romae, I740> P- ccli.
Calendar, must have been written in Germany, probably in

Bavaria.
17. I must next draw attention to some MSS. containing

the Athanasian Creed which were written in England in
the tenth century., and which are necessarily important in
reference to the early use of the Creed in our own Church
and country. The first to be noticed, as it is probably
the earliest, is a British Museum MS., Bib. Reg. 2. B. v.
The greater part of this volume is occupied by a Psalter,
written in the early part of the tenth century and in
a distinctly English hand, at one time the property of
Archbishop Cranmer, whose autograph Thomas Cantua-

riens appears at the top of its initial page. The autograph
of a later owner, Lord Lumley, is written at the bottom of
the same page. The Psalter does not commence the book,
being preceded by six leaves containing hymns and prayers,

which could not have belonged to it originally, inasmuch
as they are written in a different and a later hand, believed
by Mr. Bond, formerly Keeper of the MSS. in the British

Museum, as he stated to me, to be of the eleventh century.
Probably these leaves were not united to the Psalter till
after Cranmer's time, whose autograph is not found upon
them. On the other hand, as the first of them bears the
autograph of Lord Lumley, they may have been bound up
with it by him. The Psalter is Roman, and it has an
interlinear Saxon gloss or version, and marginal notes in
Latin. It is worth noting that the apocryphal i5ist

Psalm is omitted. The Old Testament Canticles are
assigned respectively to the various week-days on which
they were used, as for instance, Canticum Ezechi^ regis
'
feria ii.' Then follow the Benedicite entitled

'
Hymnus
trium puerorum in camino cantantium,' Benedictus, Magni-
ficat, Nunc dimittis entitled
'
Canticum Symeonis quando
portavit Ihesum Christum in ulnis suis.' Next the Athana-

sian Creed with the remarkable
'
title, Hymnus Athanasii

de fide Trinitatis, quern tu concelebrans discutienter in-
tellege.' At the end of the second verse, but written

c
in the
margin, occurs the rubric, Incipit de fide.'
Dr. Swainson considered the position of these words to be
very significant, as implying that the two first verses are of

a supplementary character, a mere setting of the Creed.
But there can be no doubt they were placed where they
are simply for convenience sake. It is not uncommon in
MSS. to find a word or two, which could not be brought

in at the end of the line to which they properly belong,
inserted in a vacant space at the end of another line, where
of course they are separated from their context. That this
was the case here, we have a proof in the fact that in
a Salisbury tenth-century Psalter, which we shall very
shortly notice, where the Athanasian Creed has the same
peculiar title as in this MS., it is immediately followed by
these very same words, '
Incipit de fide.' collation of A

the text of the Creed will be found in Appendix E. It is
accompanied by marginal notes, which bear an obvious

connexion with a Commentary upon it, or rather collection
of notes, which I printed on a former occasion from a Paris
MS. of the beginning of the tenth century 1 and I have ,
now reproduced in Appendix I. After the Qnicunq2ie

comes the Gloria in excelsis, which has also a peculiar title,
'
Oratio pura cum laudatione.' It will be noticed that the
Lord's Prayer, the Apostles' Creed, the Te Deum and the
apocryphal i5ist Psalm are all absent from this Psalter.

All the Canticles, including the Quicunque and Gloria in
excelsis, have an interlinear Saxon version or gloss.
1
Early History of the Atlianasiau Creed, by G. D. W. Ommanney, pp. 42,
43, and Appendix to the same volume, pp. 376-386.
1 8. Lambeth, 437. If this manuscript belongs to the

ninth century, the date assigned to it by the catalogue of
MSS. at Lambeth, it is the earliest MS. written in England
which contains the Athanasian Creed. But Wanley in his
account of Anglo-Saxon MSS. places it in the time of

Edgar or a little before
1
. And as Edgar came to the
throne A.D. 959, it may be fairly set down as belonging
to the middle of the tenth century, supposing this opinion
to be correct. The MS., which is imperfect at the begin-
ning, commences with the treatise respecting the Psalms,
which is frequently found in Psalters among the pre-
liminary documents Rufinus' translation of St. Basil's
preface to the Psalms having for initial words,

'
Canticum
psalmorum animas decorat.' After a prayer to be used
before the recital of the Psalms comes a Calendar, which
is apparently an insertion, being written in a different and
later hand. Then the Psalter, with an interlinear Saxon
version or gloss. It is Gallican, and has the obeli and
asterisks. The apocryphal i5ist Psalm follows, but with-
out any interlinear Saxon gloss. Then a form of Con-
fession, both in Latin and Saxon, entitled Confessio pro
'
peccatis ad Deum.' This is written in a different hand.

The Canticles follow in the original hand, first the usual
Old Testament Canticles, then successively the Te Deum
entitled Hymnum ad matutinis diebus dominicis,' Bene-
'
dicite, Benedictus, Magnificat, the Lord's Prayer entitled

'
Oratio Dominica secundum Mattheum,' the Apostles'
'
Creed, Gloria in excelsis entitled Canticus angelicus,' and,

'
lastly, the Athanasian Creed entitled Fides catholica

sancti Athanasii episcopi.' All these have an interlinear
1 '
Codex membranaceus Eaclgari regis Anglo-Saxonum temporibus aut
paulo ante exaratus.' Humfredi Wanleii Librorum seftentrionalium Catalogus,
p. 269. It is subjoined to Hickes' Thesaurus.
Saxon version or gloss. A Litany is added in a later

hand, containing among some English
the saints invoked
names, as Dunstan, Odilo, Guthlac, Margareta, and some
petitions which show the conventual use of the book, viz.
'
Ut episcopos et abbates nostros et omnes congregationes illis commissas in
sancta religione conservare digneris :
Ut regularibus disciplinis nos instrnere digneris, Te rogamus :
Ut locum istum et omnes habitantes in eo visitare et consolari digneris.'
19. A third English Psalter of the tenth century is
deposited in the Cathedral Library at Salisbury, numbered

150. . It is little, if at all, later than the Lambeth Psalter,
the date being indicated not only by the handwriting but
by a table of epacts and indictions extending from A. D. 969

to 1006. Hence Sir E. M. Thompson, in the catalogue of
the Salisbury MSS., which is his work, assigns it to the
second half of the tenth century. The account of this MS.
in the second volume of the Palaeographical Society's
publications describes it as written in Saxon minuscules
'
about A.D. 969.' The Psalter is preceded by a Calendar as

well as the table just mentioned : it is Gallican with an
interlinear Saxon gloss, and is followed by the '

Pusillus
'
eram or the apocryphal i5ist Psalm, which has no gloss.

Then comes a prayer to be used after reciting the Psalter,
beginning
'
Omnipotens et misericors Deus.' This is
marked as the conclusion of the Psalms by the rubric

'
Explicit Liber Psalmorum.' Then follow in succession

the Benedicite, Magnificat, Benedictus, Te Deum, Nunc
dimittis, Gloria in excelsis, the Lord's Prayer, the Apostles'
Creed, and the Athanasian Creed. All these have an

interlinear Saxon version or gloss. It is worthy of notice
that although the order of the New Testament Canticles
and Qiiicunque and Gloria in excelsis in this Psalter differs
from that in the British Museum Psalter, Bib. Reg. 2. B. v,
and although the latter omits the Te Deum, the Lord's

Prayer, and Apostles' Creed, while the former contains
them, and although further the latter is a Roman and the
former a Gallican Psalter, still those Canticles as well as
the Athanasian Creed and Gloria in excelsis, which are
common to the two books, have in both the same peculiar
titles. This is a striking proof that the Gallican and
Roman Psalters both existed and were both in use in
England in Saxon times ;

and it also shows a certain con-
nexion between these two
Possibly they both
books.
proceeded from the same scriptorium or the writer of the ;
Salisbury book may have had before him at once a Gal-

lican Psalter which he followed in the Psalms and a Roman
Psalter similar to the British Museum book from whence

he derived these peculiar titles of the Benedicite, New
Testament Canticles, the Qnicunque, and Gloria in excelsis.
In the MS. before us, as before mentioned, the words
'Incipit de fide' immediately follow the title of the

Athanasian Creed, '
Hymnus Athanasii de fide Trinitatjs

quern tu discutienter intellege.' The two sentences are
written together in three lines before the commencement
of the Creed. The Athanasian Creed is succeeded by
a Litany, which contains petitions similar to those which
I quoted from the Lambeth Psalter. The inference of
course is that this also was a monastic Psalter. The Litany
comprises names of both French and English saints.

Among the latter are Êlfeagus, Albanus, Eadmundus, Os-
waldus, Cuthbertus, Dunstanus, Guthlacus and as yElfeage ;
was martyred in the year 1012, the Litany cannot be earlier

than the eleventh century. Itappears to have been com-
menced by the original hand ;
but this was erased, Sir E. M.
Thompson says, and it was recommenced and finished in

a hand of the twelfth century.
m.] Manuscript Copies. 145
Some
passages from the book of Job are added at the
end in handwriting of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries.
Two facsimiles of this interesting MS., one from the
Calendar, the other from the Psalms, are printed in the
second volume of the Palaeographical Society's publica-
tions, plates 188, 189.
According to the description of the catalogue, which is, as

I have already said, by Sir E. M. Thompson, the interlinear
gloss from the beginning of the Psalms to the beginning of
the Litany is of contemporary date. note respecting it, A
which I think worth recording, appears on the fly-leaf,
signed H. Hatcher, Salisbury, Jan. i, 1831.' It is as
'
follows The Anglo-Saxon interpretation is not a literal

:
(
translation, but merely the Anglo-Saxon word answering

to the Latin word without any regard to the sense or the
structure of the former language.' Similarly our eminent
English scholar, Mr. Skeat, remarks The object of the :
'
gloss was to enable an Englishman reading to understand

it. It is not a translation, nor could it be used inde-
pendently of the Latin, as the words are out of order for ;
they follow the Latin order, and do not receive their

proper inflexional endings, such as would allow them to
form sentences. Yet the meaning is quite clear, and we
can hence infer what a translation would have been
like V These remarks are of great value as showing
the nature and use of the gloss in these Psalters of the
tenth century, and also found in Psalters of the succeed-
ing century, as Arundel 60 and Cambridge University

Library Ff. I. 23.
A Quicunque in this MS.

collation of the text of the
will be found in Appendix E.
20. The next copy of the Athanasian Creed I shall refer
1
The Creeds of the Church, by C. A. Swainson, p. 484.
L
146 Documentary Evidence, [CH.
to does not appear in a Psalter, but in a collection of

Formularies or Confessions of Faith.
Paris Bibliotheque Nationale, Latin 2341, is a bulky
volume comprising apparently three originally distinct
parts, but written throughout in handwriting of the same .
character. assigned to the ninth century by the

It is
catalogue, but by the present authorities of the MS. de-

partment in the Bibliotheque is not considered to be earlier
than the tenth. The second part of this volume contains
'
'
first the
Tractatus contra quinque haereses attributed to
St. Augustine. Its genuineness is denied by the Bene-
dictine editors of that Father's works, who have in con-
sequence relegated it to their Appendix

1
Then comes .
'
Altercatio Athanasii episcopi contra Arrium,' which is
edited among the works of Vigilius Tapsensis. This is
succeeded by a series of Confessions of Faith preceded by
'
the following list of titles : i.
Exemplar fidei catholice
Niceni concilii. ii. Fides catholica a sanctis patribus
exposita. iii, Damnatio blasphemiae Arrii. iiii. Fides
catholica dicta a sancto Athanasio episcopo Alexan-
drine, v. Fides catholica dicta a sancto Iheronimo (sic]
presbitero. vi. Fides catholica dicta a sancto Gregorio
Caesariensis (sic] episcopo. vii. Fides catholica ab orto-
doxis patribus exposita. viii. Fides catholica sancti

Valeriani episcopi. viiii. Fides catholica sancti Gregorii
maioris. x. Fides catholica a sanctis patribus exposita.
xi.Fides catholica sancti Ambrosii episcopi. xii. Dogma

sanctorum patrum trecentorum x. et viii. episcoporum.'
The fourth of these is of course the Qiiictinque, which
occurs on f.
149 with the title, slightly varied from
'
the above, Fides dicta a sancto Athanasio
episcopo/
The fifth, the title of which in the heading of its text
1
Migne, Patrol. Latina, torn. xlii. p. 1101.
similarly varies from that which it bears in the above

list, catholica being omitted, is not, it must be noted, the
'
confession commonly described as Hieronymi fides/ but
another generally designated
'
Damasi Symbolum.' It
represents the Holy Spirit as proceeding de Patre.' The
'
sixth entitled in the heading of the text ' Exemplar fidei

catholicae Gregorii Caesariensis episcopi/ is the Confes-
sion of Gregory Thaumaturgus which was translated by
Rufinus. The seventh, entitled in the heading of the text
'
Exemplar fidei catholice,' is the Confession frequently

'
entitled
'
Romanorum or
Fides '
Fides ecclesiae Romanae.'
It has much in common with the Damasi Symbolum,'
'
but is still a distinct document 1

. The eighth commences
'Audi Israel,' and asserts the equality of the Three Divine
Persons. The eleventh,
'
Fides catholica sancti Ambrosii
'
episcopi previously referred to is sometimes entitled in

MSS. 'Expositio fidei catholicae contra haeresim Ar-
rianam V sometimes '
De fide catholica
'
as in Paris, Latin,
3836. It Nos patrem et filium et spiritum sanc-

begins
'
tum confitemur,' and ends Adversus veritatem rebellis.'

'
The last, the title of which is more fully given in the

'
heading of the document Dogma sanctorum patrum

trecentorum decem et octo episcoporum congregatis (sic)
aput Niceam Bithiniae,' is none other than the Liber de
dogmatibns commonly attributed to Gennadius,
ecclesiasticis
and frequently in MSS. attributed to St. Augustine, but

printed in the Appendix to his works by the Benedictine
editors, as not being genuine. The title is remarkable, and
1
For some account of these two Confessions I may be permitted to refer to
my work, Early History of the Athanasian Creed, pp. 202 -212 in the same :
volume, Appendix H, pp. 398-402, the text of both is printed from Paris MSS.
2
See Quesnelli, Disstrtatio II de variis fidei libettis, printed by Galland in
DC vetustis Canonum collectionibus disscrtalionum sylloge, torn. i.
Magontiaci,
1790.
L 2
seems to be an amplification of a similar title applied to

the same document in another and earlier Paris MS.,
dogma (sic] ecclesiastica secundum

'
Latin. 10612 : Doctrina
Nicenum concilium.' If so, we are led to understand it as
intended to imply no more than a doctrinal agreement of
this formulary with the Nicene Council. These Confessions
or Formularies of Faith are followed in this MS. by several

works relating to doctrine and dogma which it is needless
to mention in detail.
The same series of Confessions of Faith appears in
another Paris MS., No. 3076 of the tenth century. The
two MSS. clearly have a close connexion, as they not only
share in common these formularies, but other documents
also,arranged in the same order. At the same time each
has some matter not found in the other. collation of A
the text of the Athanasian Creed from Paris, 2075, is
supplied in the Appendix, Note E.

21. Vat. 82. is an absolutely unique Psalter. It is so in
the first place as regards the text, which is quite peculiar,

having been constructed for the occasion, as we learn from
the preface, in which the compositor states the principles
on which his revision was based, and explains the meaning
of certain signs adopted for the purpose of indicating his
alterations of the text. His object was to remove what was
superfluous, and to insert what was congruous ;

and in the
work of emendation he had been guided by the authority

of Greek Psalters, where they were not at variance with
Jerome. This Psalter is unique, secondly, in regard to the

and arrangement, as well as their
Canticles, their selection
'
text. They are entitled Cantica prophetarum,' and are
'
as follows i. Canticum Esaie prophete,' being Isaiah
:
xxvi. verses 9-20 inclusive, beginning

{
De
nocte vigilat
spiritus meus.' 2.
'
Canticum seu oratio Annae/ the song
of Hannah. 3.
'
Canticum seu oratio Abbacuc prophetae.'
3
4. Canticum lonah prophetae, beginning ' Clamavi ad

'
dominum deum meum.' 5. 'Canticum Deuteronomii,' the

song of Moses beginning 'Attende caelum et loquar.' 6.
'
Canticum Exodi,' the song of Moses beginning Cantemus '
5
Domino. 7. Canticum beatae Mariae,' the Magnificat.
'
'
Hyrnnus trium puerorum,' beginning Benedictus es

'
8.
domine deus patrum meorum/ ending Benedicant te caeli, '
maria, et omnia quae in eis sunt, et laudabilis et super-

exaltatus es in saecula.
5
9. 'Ymnum trium puerorum,'

beginning
'
Benedicite omnia opera,' ending
'
Hymnum
benedicamus et superexaltemus eum in saecula.' 10.
'
Hymnum in honore trinitatis,' the Te Deum ending

'gloriam munerari. Per singulos dies benedicimus te, et
laudamus nomen tuum in eternum et in saeculum saeculi.
Salvum fac populum tuum, domine, et benedic hereditatem
tuam. Et rege illos, et extolle eos usque in aeternum.

Benedictus es domine deus patrum meorum et laudabilis
et gloriosus in saecula saeculorum.' It will be observed
that these do not correspond, whether in selection or order,
with the ordinary Canticles in Latin Psalters, nor yet with

those usually found in the Office of the Eastern Church,
which I shall mention by-and-by. But they are all, with
the exception I believe of the Song of Moses in Deutero-
nomy, used in the Ambrosian Office, and the four first are
appointed under that rite to be said at Matins on Sunday
1
.
The text of the Canticles is no less peculiar than that of

the Psalter being constructed apparently upon the
itself,
same principles, and characterized alike by the various

signs of emendation, which are described in the Preface.
And lastly, this Psalter is unique as regards the position
of the Athanasian Creed. The Te Deum is followed by
1
See article on Psalmody in Dictionary of Christian Antiquities.
a variety of hymns for the Hours, for the great festivals,

for the commemoration of particular saints, of saints in
general, and confessors and virgins, for the dedication
of a church, for imploring fine weather and rain, and in
time of war. And then comes the Athanasian Creed
'
entitled Fides catholica quam sanctus Athanasius dicta-
vit.' For a collation of the text I refer to the Appendix.
The last documents are '
Exorcismus sancti Ambrosii/
'
Consideratio psalmorum in causis diversis,' apparently
a classification of the Psalms according to their subject-
matter, and Confessio sancti Augustini episcopi.'

'
The preface to this Psalter has been printed by Vezzosi

Thomasius's works, the second volume 1
in his edition of .
In the same volume he has also printed the text of some

of the Canticles and collations of others. He describes
the i28th as 'Psalterii antiquam versionem Origenianis
aliisque signis notatam exhibens.'
What was
the locality which produced this singular
and therefore interesting Psalter? Its obvious unlikeness
to Roman and Gallican Psalters clearly forbids us to seek
for its home in Southern or Central Italy, or England,
or Germany, or Gaul. The compositor expresses a desire
to adhere to the custom of his province, which would
appear to imply that it possessed a peculiar traditional
use of its own. He does not mention the province by
name ;
but it would seem to be identified with that of
which Milan was the head and metropolitical Church, by
1
Thomasii Opera omin'a, torn, ii., continens Psalterium, recensuit A. F.
Vezzosi, Romae, 1747. The preface commences on page xx, with the following
'
foot-note referring to itNullo praemisso titulo ant inscriptione illud anti-
:
quitatis fragmentum iam indicato Vaticano MS. Idem frag-

legitur in nostro
mentum inscriptum Prologus Psalterii haberrms beneficio amplissimi Cardinalis
Passionei ex apographo ipsius cnra descripto anno 1723, ex codice x. seculi
Bibliothecae Bavaricn.e.'
the fact of the close relationship of the Canticles as found

in this book with those of the Ambrosian rite, and also
by the fact of several Milanese saints being commemo-

rated in the hymns. Thus there are hymns in honour
of Victor Nabor and Felix, who are described as 'pii
Mediolani martyres,' of Nazarius and Celsus also martyrs
'
of Milan, of 'sanctus Dionysius episcopus and 'sancttis
Simplicianus episcopus,' both of whom were early Bishops

of Milan, the former before 360 A.D., the latter in 400.
It is impossible to assign a precise date to the compilation
of this Psalter ; but, as the Bavarian

a copy MS. from
of which Vezzosi printed the preface belonged to the
tenth century, it is a necessary inference that the Psalter
could not have been compiled subsequently to that epoch,
and probably was in existence prior to it. I cannot quote
any palaeographical authority in regard to the date of the
Vatican MS. ;
it did not appear to me to be earlier than
the tenth century.
22. Vat. 84 is a very complete and magnificent Psalter,
according to Vezzosi
'
circa x. seculum scriptus V The
Psalms are preceded by a variety of documents, embracing
'
Sancti Hieronymi epistola ad Sunniam et Fretelam de
Prologus Hieronymi Presbyteri ad Paulam et

'
Psalterio,'
Eustochium,' Sermo sancti Hieronymi de Psalterio,'

'
'
Epistola Damasi episcopi urbis Romae ad Hieronymum
'
Presbyterum,' 'Rescriptum eiusdem,' Epistola Hieronymi
ad Damasum Dicta sancti Augustini de propria
Papam,'
'
'
eloquentia Psalterii,' Item Sancti Augustini quid sit

Psalterium,' Item '
dicta sancti Augustini de virtute Psalmo-
rum
'
the preface of St. Basil commencing Canticum '
Psalmorum animas decorat,' Consideratio Psalmorum in '
causis diversis,'
'
Exordia vel tituli Psalmorum.' The
1
See Thomasii Opera, Romae, 1747, vol. ii.
p. xviii.
Psalms are preceded by a picture of the Lamb bearing

the Cross surrounded by They are of the
four saints.
Roman version with some Gallican readings and each ;
one has a prologue and is followed by a prayer. After

the Psalms, or rather the apocryphal i5ist Psalm, come
the usual Old Testament Canticles, and then successively
the Benedicite, the Te Deum entitled
'
Canticum Sancto-
rum Ambrosii et Augustini,' the Benedictus, the Magnificat
entitled
'
Canticum beatissimae Genitricis Dei Mariae,' the
Nunc dimittis, the Athanasian Creed entitled
f
Fides Catho-
lica edita a beato Athanasio episcopo,' the Lord's Prayer, the
Gloria in excelsis, the Apostles' Creed entitled
'
Simbolum
Apostolorum,' the Constantinopolitan Creed with the
'
Filioque entitled very remarkably Perfecta credulitas.'

All these, including the Old Testament Canticles, are
followed by a prayer. Then comes '
Prologus Prudentii
de flores (sic) Psalmorum,' and then a picture of the
'
Crucifixion, which is followed by the title Orationes ad

adorandam crucem sive ad deposcenda suffragia sanctorum.'
But before the devotions to the saints another series of
prayers to be used in connexion with the several Canticles
and Creeds, including the Quicunqite vttlt, occurs. Among
the prayers to the saints the following addressed to St.
'
Benedict calls for notice Obsecro te, beatissime Bene-
:
dicte dilecte Dei, intercede pro servo tuo abbate et omni

hac congregatione et loco isto et pro omni populo Christiano,
ut nos omnes hie sub tuo magisterio congregati ....
custodiantur (sic)
in omni religione et sanctitate. Intercede
etiam pro me servo tuo, ut purget Deus cor meum et
actus meos a cunctis viciis. Tribuat mihi servare cuncta,

quae docuisti et custodire sanctae regulae tuae tramitem,
quern meservaturnm spopondi, ut mee professionis ex-
secutor effectus merear ad superna celorum gaudia cum
sanctis perpetuum victurus pervenire.' Then follow a

prayer of St. Gregory (Pope), prayers for the Hours, and
a Litany.
From the prayer quoted above for obedience to the rule
of St. Benedict, taken in connexion with the fact of the
Psalms belonging to the Roman version and with the
names of the saints invoked in the Litany, it is evident
that this Psalter must have been used in a Benedictine
monastery situated in Central Italy, and not improbably

in Rome or its neighbourhood.
A collation of the text of the Athanasian Creed in this
MS. also will be found in Appendix E.

23. As the use of the Athanasian Creed in our own
country is a subject necessarily of special interest to our-
selves, I am unwilling to close my notice of MSS. con-
taining it without drawing attention to a few English
Psalters of the eleventh century in which it is found. In
the Cambridge University Library is a Psalter described
by Wanley, and considered by him to have been written

shortly before the Norman Conquest .
J
It is sometimes
placed a little earlier. The press mark is Ff. I. 23. On

the inside of the cover of this volume appear the arms
of Sir Nicholas Bacon, Lord Keeper of the Great Seal in
the reign of Elizabeth, and underneath is written a memo-
randum of his presentation of the book to the University
Library, as follows: 'N. Bacon eques auratus et magni
sigilli Angliae custos librum hunc Bibliothecae Cantabrig.

dicavit. 1574.' From a note on the flyleaf, made appa-
rently by Bacon himself, we learn that was bequeathed
it
to him by Archbishop Parker :

'
This booke was be-
queathed by the right reverend father Matthewe archbishop

of Canterburye to Sir Nicholas Bacon knight, L. Keeper &c.,
1
Wanleii . . .
caialogus, p. 152.
who do give the same to the University of Cambridge.'

The date therefore assigned to the presentation of the
book to the Library must be inaccurate, as Archbishop
Parker did not die till May 17, 1575, and his will is dated
April 15 in the same year.

The Psalter, it must be noted, is a Roman Psalter, and
is accompanied throughout by an interlinear Saxon gloss
written in rubric. It is preceded by a picture of David
playing on a harp, with Asaph, Eman, Ethan, and Idithun.

There is no preliminary matter beyond some Orationes '
et preces ante Psalterium.'Just before the fifty-first Psalm,

or the fifty-second according to our own version, occurs
another picture a representation of the Crucifixion the :
Blessed Virgin and St. John stand on either side of the

cross, and the sun and moon, as is commonly the case,
are pourtrayed above. The apocryphal i5ist Psalm is
omitted. The usual Old Testament Canticles, the Bene-
dicite,the Magnificat, the Benedictus follow in order, all
of them without titles, but all accompanied, like the Psalms,
by a Saxon gloss. The Te Deum, the Nunc dimittis, the

Gloria in excelsis, the Lord's Prayer and Apostles' Creed,
which come next, it is remarkable are not glossed, but
the last four have their usual titles. The Athanasian
Creed, which follows that of the Apostles', has an inter-
linear Saxon gloss, but no title. This gloss or version
of the Quictmque was printed by Dr. Swainson in his work
on the Creeds 1 from a copy made by Mr. Skeat. Litany A
succeeds to the Athanasian Creed, containing invocations
to several English saints, in which the usual petition for
the Popefollowed immediately by another for 'our
is
Archbishop and the flock committed to him,' and this is

in turn followed by another in the usual form for the
1
pp. 484-486.
religious house where the Litany was used and its in-
habitants.
This petition for our Archbishop followed by another
suitable to a monastic establishment, coupled with the
fact of the book having been at one time the property
of Archbishop Parker, leads to the inference that either

St. Augustine's Abbey, or Christ Church, i. e. the Cathedral
Church at Canterbury, which was also it must be re-
membered a monastery at least from the end of the tenth
century, was its birthplace. The circumstance of its
being a Roman Psalter would dispose us to think that it
may with more probability be assigned to the former.
The Cotton MS. Vespasian A. I, commonly called St.
Augustine's Psalter, which formerly belonged to St. Au-
gustine's Abbey, and is believed to have been written there
about A.D. 700, is a Roman Psalter. On the other hand,
Arundel 155, which certainly had its original home in
Christ Church, Canterbury, and was probably written there,
is a Gallican Psalter.
A collation of the text of the Athanasian Creed in this
MS. is given in Appendix E.
24. The Parker MS. CCCXCI. in the Library of Corpus
Christi College, Cambridge, is also a Psalter, written about
the time of the Norman Conquest according to Wanley,
who gives the following account of it :
'
Codex crassus in
8 VO circa annum Domini 1064 exaratus, ut fas est coniicere
ex tabulis nonnullis et ex scriptura codicis, qui quondam
pertinuit etiam ad ecclesiam Wigorniensem, sicuti fidem
facit haec inscriptio super imam partem paginae primae
literis recentioribus Liber sanctae Mariae Wigorniensis

ecclesiae per sanctum Osivaldum? Then he adds :
'
Verba
quaedam abrasa quorum loco haec scripsit Johannes
locelinus: Est ementita inscriptio, nam post Oswaldi
mortem librum fuisse scriptum hinc patet^ quod in eo

sunt preces dicendae in festo translationis Oswaldi V This
description has been borrowed evidently by Nasmith in his

catalogue of the Parker MSS., with the two exceptions
that he inserts between codicis and qui the words cui
tituhis Portiforinm Osivaldi ct and omits etiam after
'
pertinuit. The title

'
Portiforium Oswaldi Wanley prefixes
to his description. The inscription referred to by him
appears still at the bottom of the first page of this book.
That never belonged to St. Oswald is clear from the

it
facts that the feast of his translation and also that of Arch-
bishop Êlfeage, whose martyrdom took place A.D. 1012, are

mentioned in the Calendar. St. Oswald was Archbishop
of York and Bishop of Worcester, and died A. D. 993. He
left hismark in the cathedral of the latter city by removing
the secular clergy and introducing monks in their place,
as Êthelwold did about the same time at Winchester.
Jocelin. who notices as stated by Wanley the error of the

inscriptionin implying that the cathedral church at
Worcester was indebted to the munificence of St. Oswald

was the Secretary of Archbishop Parker.
for the Psalter,
The Psalter is preceded by a Calendar, which would

appear from the numerous festivals of English saints
contained in it to have been compiled in England. The
Psalms belong to the Gallican version. In no case are
they preceded or followed by a prayer, and some are

without a title. They are followed by the apocryphal
15 ist Psalm. Then follow in succession the usual Old
Testament Canticles, the Te Deum, the Benedicite, the
Benedictus, the Magnificat, the Gloria in excelsis, the
Apostles' Creed, and the Athanasian all without title.
1
Wanleii Libroruin Seftentrionaliiiin catalog-its, p. no.
. . . It is the
second volume in liiekes" Thesaurus printed at Oxford, 1705.
After the Quicunqtie a Litany is added containing invocations

to numerous English saints, and immediately after the
petition for the Pope and all orders in the Church the
following :
'
Ut episcopum nostrum et gregem sibi
commissum ;
ut congregationes omnium sanctorum in tuo
sancto servitio conservare ;
. . . Ut locum istum et omnes
habitantes in eo visitare et consolari digneris te rogamus.'
The Litany is written in a different hand apparently from
the preceding part. Some hymns follow, in which the
original hand seems to be resumed, headed by the
Hymni Ambrosiani per singulas horas secundum
f
title :
constitutionem patris nostri Benedicti.' The book is con-

cluded by a large collection of collects, prayers, capitula,
embracing prayers for use in every part and chamber of
the monastery.
While it is perfectly clear that the note on the first page
is in error in connecting this psalter with St. Oswald, on
the other hand there are no grounds whatever for rejecting
'
the testimony therein given that it was Liber sanctae
Mariae Wigorniensis ecclesiae.' On the contrary it contains
much to confirm us in thinking that the cathedral church
of Worcester, which was dedicated to St. Mary, and the
Benedictine monastery connected with it, were the home
where it was written and used. The petitions of the
Litany which have quoted, one being for o^tr Bishop, the
I
other the usual formula in a monastery the hymns for

the Hours in accordance with the rule of our Father
Benedict the prayers for use in the several parts of the
religious house the feast of the translation of St. Oswald
Archbishop, which does not appear to have been generally

observed England, if we may judge from its non-
in
occurrence in the Calendar of the Sarum Breviary these

are all evidences pointing in the same direction.
For a collation of the text of the Athanasian Creed in
this MS. also Appendix E.

I refer to
25. A third English Psalter of the same epoch as the

two last mentioned I am desirous to notice, because its
birthplace can be traced to a different locality a place of
greater importance and influence at the time both civilly

and ecclesiastically than Worcester or even Canterbury.
Arundel 60 is assigned by the Catalogue of the Arundel
MSS. in the British Museum to the end of the eleventh
century Wanley is of opinion that it was written during

;
the reign of Edward the Confessor. It begins with a Calendar

which is remarkable as containing a great number of
festivals of early Winchester bishops or saints or of events
connected with them not only the well-known Winchester
bishop and saint, Swithun, but ./Elfgytha regina, Hsedda

episcopus. Rumpaldus confessor. Byrnstanus episcopus we :
' '
have also Translatio sancti Birini episcopi/ Translatio
'
sancti Ê]?elpoldi episcopi,' and Depositio sancti Birini
episcopi.' The Psalms are preceded by a picture of the
Crucifixion the Blessed Virgin and St. John stand at the
;
foot of the cross on either side, the sun and the moon are
represented above, and our Lord's body is vested from the

waist to the knees; the feet too are separately nailed.
The Psalms are of the Gallican version, and they are
accompanied throughout by an interlinear Saxon gloss or
version. The fifty-first Psalm the fifty-second in our
version preceded by another picture of the Crucifixion
is :
Mary and St. John do not appear, and in their

in this St.
places on either side of the cross are what seem to be

intended as representations of stems of trees without .
leaves the usual symbols of the sun and

; moon are also
wanting the body of our Lord is bent, and

; is vested, as in
the other case, from the waist to the knees. The picture is
surrounded by a decorated border. Professor Westwood

in his Facsimiles has given an account of these two pictures
and a facsimile of the second. The apocryphal i5ist

Psalm follows the Psalms: then come the usual Old
Testament Canticles, the Benedicite, the Magnificat, the
Benedictus, the Te Deum with the remarkable title
'Ymnum sancti Viceti episcopi diebus dominicis ad

matutinis,' the Nunc dimittis, the Gloria in excelsis, the
Lord's Prayer, the Apostles' Creed, and the Athanasian
'
with the title Fides Catholica Athanasi Alexandrini.' All
these, as well as the Psalms, have an interlinear Saxon
gloss or version. A
Litany follows containing numerous
invocations to English saints the Welsh saint Cougar and
:
the Irish saint Patrick are also among the saints addressed :
the name it may be added, is found too in the

of the latter,
Calendar. After the usual petition for the Pope in the
Litany there follows immediately, as might be expected in
a Litany used in the royal and capital city of Winchester,
a petition for our King and princes, and then another for
our Bishop and the flock committed to him. It is not so in
the two last-mentioned Psalters. In the first of these,
used at Canterbury, the petition for the Pope is, as we saw,
followed immediately by a petition for the Archbishop and
his flock, and in the second used at Worcester it is followed
immediately by a petition for the Bishop and his flock.

After the Litany some prayers are added. The end of the
Litany and some of the leaves containing the prayers are
written in a different, and apparently rather later, hand
from the preceding portion of the book. The last leaf,
written in yet another hand, comprises, first notes respecting
the six ages of the world, and then a list of West Saxon
Bishops:
'
Nomina episcoporum occidentalium Saxonum.'
These are arranged in two divisions, the first of which
obviously consists of the Bishops of Dorchester, beginning

with Birinus and ending with Haedda, both of whose names
appear, as has been noticed, in the Calendar of this Psalter.
Hsedda, Dean Kitchin says migrated to Winchester, carry-
1
,
'
ing with him the bones of St. Birinus and the Translatio
'
:
'
and Depositio of the Apostle of Winchester and first
'
Bishop of Wessex were necessarily famous events in the
early annals of the Church of Winchester, and noted in her

Calendar. The second division of this list of West-Saxon
Bishops after a few words, some of which are illegible but
which refer apparently to the transference of the bishopstool
to Winchester, commences with Daniel and ends with

Walkelin, who became Bishop soon after the accession of
William the Conqueror and died A. D. 3098. In this divi-
sion are found the names of Rumpald, Byrnstan, AJ>elpold,
which are also in the Calendar. I have mentioned these
particulars as clearly connecting the book with Winchester.
And it would be natural to assume that they connect it
also with the cathedral church of Winchester, the Old
Minster of St. Swithun. But I have noticed a further
trace of this connexion, which does not appear to me
Among the prayers which follow the Litany
insignificant.
isa long one addressed to St. Nicholas, who is also com-
memorated in the Calendar, his name being distinguished
by being written in capital letters. A few days after I first
inspected this Psalter I happened to visit Winchester

Cathedral, and my attention being necessarily drawn to
the very interesting Norman font, I was informed that
the curious sculptures carved upon it have for their subject
the legendary history of that saint. With this evidence of
a common cultus before me, the thought was brought home
to my mind in a very real manner that the designer of the
1
Historic Towns, Winchester, p. 8.
i".] Manuscript Copies. 161
font and the compositor of the British Museum MS.,

which had interested me so recently, must have been, if
not one and the same person, at any rate members and
brethren of the same household that which formerly had
its home beneath the walls of the glorious temple where
I was standing, and worshipped at its altars.
only remains to add, that Professor Westwood in his

It
notice of this book, before alluded to, speaks of the
drawings and decorations with which it is enriched being

in the style of Winchester volumes.
26. The Bodleian MS., Canonici Patr. Lat. 88, is a very
complete Psalter, assigned by the catalogue to the eleventh

century, originally used, as it appears, in some Benedictine
monastery in Central or Northern Italy, but not in the

diocese of Milan. The Psalms
are preceded by several
documents, including a Calendar, nearly all of which are

found also in Vat. 84, previously noticed, but they are not
arranged in the same order. It is a Roman Psalter; and
each Psalm is accompanied by the proper title, and an
exposition and prayer. The apocryphal i5ist Psalm
follows. Then the usual Old Testament Canticles, each
with a note of the day of the week on which it is used,
and to each a prayer is appropriated. They are entitled
'
Cantica prophetarum.' Then successively the Benedicite,
the Benedictus,. the Magnificat, the Gloria in excelsis, each
likewise with a prayer annexed. Then the Nunc dimittis,
the Apostles' Creed, the Constantinopolitan Creed, with
'
the Filioque clause entitled Fides patrum,' the Lord's
Prayer, the Te Deum, and lastly, the Athanasian Creed

with the noteworthy title Fides Anathasii episcopi.' After
'
the Athanasian Creed comes the rubric,

'
Consumatio
'
psalmodie so that the Canticles and Lord's Prayer and

:
Creeds are included in the psalmody. The following is

M
Subjoined to the Athanasian Creed, but without any rubric

describing it as Oratio,' which it may be presumed was
'
omitted inadvertently :
'
Domine Dens Omnipotens, qui es
trinus in personis et unus in deitate, conditor, nutritor,
gubernator, et moderator meus, Te adoro, Te laudo, Te
glorifico, Tibi gratias ago, Tibi sit laus et gloria et omnis
honor per aeterna et sempiterna saecula saeculorum. Amen.'
following is subjoined to the Te Deum Te '
Similarly the :
decet laus, Te decet ymnus, Tibi gloria Deo, Patri et Filio

cum Sancto Spiritu, in saecula saeculorum. Amen.' It
is interesting to note that in the Gloria in excelsis the
clause,
'
Qui sedes ad dexteram Dei Patris, miserere
nobis/ preceded by
is rubric, the
'
lacob frater Domini
Hierosalymitanus addidit,' and similarly the conclusion
Quoniam Tu solus sanctus Sec.' by the rubric Cyrillus
;
'
Alexandrinus adiunxit.' At the Apostles' Creed the names

of the Apostles to whom the several clauses are attributed
are added in the margin in rubric. After the rubric
'
'
Consumatio psalmodie an intercessory prayer follows,
and then a prayer preparatory for the Litany. In the
Litany it is worthy of notice that among the saints invoked

St.Benedict the only one whose name is distinguished
is
by being written in capitals, and his name is followed by
those of Maurus and Placidus, though not written like

his in capitals. They were both famous as his disciples.
There are petitions similar to those usually found in
Litanies for monastic use, of which I have quoted some
instances, only the petition immediately succeeding that

for the not for our bishop or archbishop as the case
pope is
'
might be, but for our bishops and abbots and the flocks
committed to them'; and there is no petition for king or
princes. After the Lord's Prayer occur the versicles Pro :
'
pastore nostro Beatus qui intelligit super egenum et

:
Ill
] Manuscript Copies. 163
pauperem. Pro imperatore nostro Domine, salvum fac :
imperatorem nostrum. Pro episcopis et abbatibus nostris:

Dominus conservet eos et omnes sibi commissos.' The
Litany is followed by several prayers for private use to be
said after the Psalter; 'Orationes post finitum Psalterium
pro semet ipso.' The subjoined is interesting as evidence

in addition to that above produced of this being a Bene-
dictine Psalter, and also of the sacramental efficacy attached
to the recitation of the Psalter in the middle ages :
'
Exaudi
me indignum famulum tuurn et peccatorem et per hos ;
psalmos, quos decantavi, da mini et parentibus meis et

omnibus, pro quibus debitor sum exorare, veniam de
omnibus peccatis
nostris et concede nobis semper cogitare,
;
loqui, et agere, que placita sunt nobis expediunt, ut

tibi et
omnes actus nostri in tua dispositione firmentur et, inter- ;
cedente beata et gloriosa semperque virgine Dei genitrice

Maria et beato Michahele Archangelo et sancto Benedicto
cum omnibus ab omnibus nos absolve peccatis et
sanctis,
a cunctis defende periculis,' &c. Maria and Benedicto are
written in capitals. A marginal note in a different hand
from that of the text is added upon the words cum
'
omnibtis sanctis, as follows : sanctissimis Apostolis Barto-
lomaeo et lacobo ac gloriosissimo yheronimo (sic] et sancto
'
Sebastiano/ The Planctus of St. Isidore concludes the

'
volume.
On the fly-leaf is a note in a modern hand saying that
the Litanies are for the Benedictine use, and that from the
saints of the Calendar and the Litanies the Psalter appears
to have belonged to some monastery of Gaul. That the
book was used a Benedictine monastery is sufficiently
in
clear from the evidence I have adduced from the Litany

and prayer at the end, which is confirmed by the appear-
ance of the names Benedictns and aunts in the Calendar M
M 2
in capital letters. But that the monastery where it was

used was situated in Gaul is a hypothesis, which is dis-
proved, first by the fact of the Psalms belonging to the
Roman version of the Psalter which was not accepted in
Gaul, but was used in Italy more or less down to the
pontificate of Pius V, also by the supplication in the

versicles of the Litany for the Emperor, and lastly by
the character of the handwriting, which is distinctly Italian,

as I am informed by Mr. Macray and Mr. Madan of the
Bodleian Library. And the names of the saints which
appear in the Calendar and Litany, as well as the version
of the Psalms and the character of the handwriting, point
home of the book for among them
to Italy as the original ;
the Italian names have the preponderance, there are but

few comparatively belonging to Gaul and Germany, and
I believe there is not a single one that is English. The
petition for the Emperor would be perfectly consistent and
appropriate in a Psalter written in Central or Northern
Italy in the eleventh century, especially if written before
the pontificate of Gregory VII, considering the relations of
the German Emperors to those countries at that epoch ]
.
37. Our notice of MSS. may be fitly closed with the

a
mention of one, which is described by M. Batiffol as the
oldest manuscript Breviary extant. This book, the property
of the Mazarine Library at Paris (Cod. Mazarin. 364),
possesses a special interest in reference to the history of our

document, showing that, as belonging to the canonical
office, it was admitted from the very first into Breviaries.
From internal documentary evidence it appears to have
been written at the celebrated Benedictine Abbey at
Monte Casino in the year 1099 ;
and it is a beautiful
1 '
See Hallam's Middle Ages, vol. i. pp. 332, 333.
2
Histoire du Brlmaire Remain, Paris, 1893, p. 195.
in
.] Manuscript Copies. 165
manuscript, executed in a Lombardic hand, and decorated

with rich initial letters and pictures. After the Calendar
comes a Psalter followed by the Canticles, Gloria in excelsis,
Te Deum, Lord's Prayer, Apostles' Creed, Athanasian
Creed and Litanies. For the other contents it may suffice
to refer to M. Batiffol's account This must be the same
book which is by Waterland as a Breviary and
noticed
Psalter for the use of the monks of Monte Casino, men-
tioned by Pagi and Quesnel. He adds that the title
'
assigned by it to the Quicunque is Fides Catholica edita

ab Athanasio Alexandrinae sedis Episcopo.'
It is needless and would be tedious to notice any more
MSS. of the Athanasian Creed. The number of extant

copies of it in Latin is very great ;
and those to which
I have drawn attention are but a selection, and must not
be regarded as a comprehensive and exhaustive series even
for the period which they embrace from the eighth to
the eleventh century. But they sufficiently illustrate the
early use and reception of the Qnicungue in the Western

Church. They are found in books of various kinds,
collections of Canons, of Formularies of the Faith and
Dogmatic treatises, and Psalters ;

and the Psalters are
typical of various countries, Germany, Italy and
Gaul,
England. At the risk of being tedious I have described
in some degree the contents of these books, inherited by
us from antiquity, with the view of showing their nature
and importance and the position in them of our Creed, and
more particularly of tracing, where possible, the age and
locality which produced them.
CHAPTER IV.
COMMENTARIES OR EXPOSITIONS.
THE Athanasian Creed in the ancient Western Church

was frequently made the subject of comment and exposi-
tion the purpose of instruction in the fundamental
for
truths of the Trinity and Incarnation. These expositions,

which seem to have originated in a series of notes upon the
text, are often found in manuscript Psalters written by the
side of the Creed in a separate column, or in two marginal
columns with the Creed in the centre, the several verses
being accompanied by their respective comments, but they

are also found as distinct documents, especially in collec-
tions of dogmatic and doctrinal treatises and expositions.
i. The probably the Commentary attributed
earliest is
to Venantius Fortunatus, an Italian by birth who migrated

into France about the year A.D. 565, and became Bishop of
Poictiers late in the sixth century. He must have died
very early in the succeeding century, but the exact date of
his death is not known. Both Muratori (who was the
Librarian of the Ambrosian Library at Milan in the early
part of the eighteenth century) and Waterland assign the

work without doubt to him, and the latter thinks that
the date of it may be fixed with probability about the
1
year 570, or even higher . But there is great diversity of
Muratori, Anecdota,vo\. ii. p. 331 Waterland, History of the Athanasian
1
;
Creed, pp. 43-45, Oxford edition, 1870.

Commentaries or Expositions. 167
opinion upon the authorship of Venantius

subject, the
Fortunatus being denied for instance by the writers of the
Literary History of France it is also denied by the editor
:
of his works, Michael Angelus Luchi, who considers that

the style of our Commentary is dissimilar from that gene-
rally observable in the writings of Venantius and recently ;
Professor Heurtley, .who at accepted without hesitation

first
the opinion of Muratori and Waterland, afterwards avouched

himself to be/ less satisfied than formerly' upon the point.
It must be acknowledged that the evidence for the author-
ship of Venantius is not conclusive. It rests upon a single
MS., and that a MS. not earlier than the eleventh century
with one exception the latest of the MSS. in which the
Commentary is found. In that Codex the Commentary is
'
entitledExpositio fidei catholic^ Fortunati.' There can
be no doubt that the expositio, not the fides calholica, is
here referred to as the work of Fortunatus. Even if this
were not the obvious sense of the words, it would be

sufficiently proved by the fact that the Athanasian Creed
' '
isnot unfrequently described as Fides Catholica simply :
some instances of which have been already noticed. Neither

can there be any reasonable doubt that the Fortunatus here
intended Venantius Fortunatus, for in this same volume,
is
which is of great bulk and contains a variety of documents,

the Commentary of that author upon the Apostles' Creed
also occurs, and that previously, and it is described by the
Expositio a Fortunate presbitero conscripta.' For-
'
title
tunattis presbiter is the well-known appellation of Venantius
Fortunatus. Thus the testimony of this MS. seems clear

enough ;
but of the other known MSS. of the Commentary
not a single one attributes it to Fortunatus, nor indeed to
any author. To turn to internal evidence, there is on the

one hand a certain resemblance of thought between the
Commentary of Venantius Fortunatus on the Apostles'

Creed and our Commentary on that of St. Athanasius,
arising probably from their both being drawn in some
degree, directly or indirectly, from Rufinus's Commentary
on the Apostles' Creed, and there is also in two instances
a remarkable coincidence of expression between the two
documents, which would suggest that if. they were not both
by the same hand, one must have been borrowed from the
other and on the other hand, there is at least one im-
;
portant discrepance between the two works, which seems

to forbid us regarding them as written by the same person 1 .
The pairs of passages containing this verbal resemblance are as follows

1
;
'Nee quaeratur quomodo genuit filiura? quod et angeli nesciunt, pro-

(1)
phetis est incognitum. Unde illud dictum est, Generationem illius quis
enarrabit ? Nee a nobis discutiendus est sed credendus,' &c. Venantii
. . .
Fortunati Expositio Symboli.

'
Nee quaeratur quomodo genuit Filium, quod et angeli nescinnt, prophetis
est incognitum, unde eximius propheta Esaias dicit Generationem eius quis
enarrabit ? . . . Nee inenarrabilis et inaestimabilis Deus a servulis suis discu-
tiendus est, sed fideliter credendus.' Expositio Jidei catholicae Fortunati.
The Oxford Junius MS. for gemiit Filium reads genitus sit, but the
Milan MS. and Paris 1008 reo.dg'eHutt Filium.
Quod vero Dens maiestatis de Maria in carne natus est, non est sordi-
'
(2)
dattis nascendo de Virgine. . . .
Denique sol aut ignis, si lutum inspiciat, quod
tetigerit purgat, et se tamen non inquinat.' Venantii Fortunati Expositio
Symboli.
'
Etsi Deus, Dei filius, nostram luteam et mortalem carnem . . .
adsumpsit,
se tamen nulbtenus inquinavit. Quia . . . si sol aut ignis aliquid immundum
tetigerit,quod tangit purgat, et se nullatenus coinquinat.' Expositio Jidei
catholicae Fortunati.
In both these cases the idea of the two documents seems to be derived
originallyfrom Rufinus, but the verbal resemblance between them is far closer
than between either of them and that author.
The passages referred to above as presenting an important discrepance are
the following :
'
ludicaturus vivos et mortitos :
Aliqui dicunt vivos iustos, mortuos vero
iniustos ;
aut certe vivos, quos in corpore invenerit adventus Dominicus, et
intelligairmsmortuos iam sepultos. Nos tamen vivos et mortuos, hoc est,
animas corpora pariter iudicanda.' Venantii Fortunati Expositio Symboli.
et
A note in the edition of Venantius printed at Rome in 1786 states that
infelligamns in the above is omitted by some MSS.
The authorship of the Commentary being thus uncertain

cannot be taken as determining the date of its composition.
Are there any other criteria by which we may arrive at an
approximate conclusion upon the point ? In the first place,
from the fact of there being known to us six, if not seven,
manuscripts of the document belonging to the ninth century
one of them to the early part of it the inference is un-
avoidable that must have existed prior to that century,
it
unless indeed the earliest was the original copy of the
author, which there is no reason for believing it to be.

And this inference receives a very clear confirmation from
a Commentary lately in 1892 printed for the first time
from a MS. at Orleans and attributed by the editor to

1
Theodulf , which in two passages, one of which I shall
produce in extenso by-and-by, evidently borrows from and

follows our document. We have here a clear proof that
the latter must have been composed prior to the ninth
century, inasmuch as the Orleans exposition, even though it

be not the work of Theodulf, which is indeed very doubtful,
cannot be of a later date, the MS. being assigned to that
century by M. Del isle.
Thus external evidence points to the conclusion that
the Fortunatus Commentary belongs to a higher antiquity
than the ninth century. Internal evidence supplies us with
grounds for a nearer approximation to its date, as the late

Dr. Heurtley, Margaret Professor of Divinity at Oxford,
And '
Inde venturits iitdicarc vivos ei mortuos. Vivos dicit eos quos tune
adventus Dominicus in corpora vivendos invenerit, et mortuos iam ante
sepultos ;
et aliter dicit vivos iustos et mortuos peccatores.' Expositio Fidei
catholicae Fortunati.
It will be observed that Venantius accepts neither of the alternative inter-
pretations mentioned by the commentator on the Athanasian Creed, as by

St. Augustine in several places. In the interpretation which he adopts he
follows apparently Rufinus.
1
Theodiilfe, sa -vie et ses awvres, par M. Cuissard. Orleans, 1892.
1 70 Documentary Evidence. [CH.
l
pointed out in an able pamphlet written in 1873 In the .
first place he argued that the Commentary could not have
been written during the period when the doctrine of the

double Procession and the heresy of Adoptionism were the
prominent subjects of controversy in the Western Church,
that the early part of the ninth and the close of the
is,
preceding century. Had it been composed at that time, in

all probability it would have referred to these controversies
either by employing the peculiar terminology which they
evoked or by dwelling emphatically upon the points at
issue. But this is not the case. In regard to the first,
the Procession of the Holy Spirit from the Father and the
Son is twice stated, but only simply and incidentally,' says
'
Dr. Heurtley, '

without one word of vindication or enlarge-
ment, such as might assuredly have been expected had any
controversy on the subject been on foot.' And this is not
all, for the three verses which formulate the relations
between the three Divine Persons, including that which
declares that the Holy Ghost is of the Father and of the
(
Son,' are not quoted at all, nor made the subject of com-
ment. This, may add,
I especially remarkable consider-
is
ing that at this very epoch these same verses were quoted
by Theodulf, Bishop of Orleans, in his treatise written by
express command of Charlemagne with reference to the
controversy in question. True, the commentator may
have thus passed over these verses because he had incor-
porated them in sum and substance in his comment on
the fifth verse nevertheless it is most unlikely, had he
;
constructed his exposition at a time when the question of

the Procession was exercising men's minds, that he would
have failed to draw attention to the one passage in the
1
The Athanasian Creed, reasons for rejecting Mr, Ffoulkes's theory, by
C. A. Heurtley, D.D. Oxford, 1872.
Creed obviously and directly relevant to the point at issue

and to make it the subject of remark. The Commentary
is also noticeable for its omission of all reference to the
Adoptionist controversy. No work touching upon the

'
subject of the Incarnation,' says the writer before cited,

'written between 785 and 835, would have avoided reference
to it. Yet in Fortunatus's Commentary the reader will
search in vain for any trace of those critical expressions

the repudiation of the doctrine that our Lord was in one
respect not the proper but only the adopted, nuncupative

Son of God which one might naturally expect to meet
with in writings of the age V It should be added that
the controversy respecting the Procession was a subject

of discussion at the Council of Gentili held as early as
A. D. 767. We are thus led to the conclusion that the
Commentary was drawn up at. some time previous to the

latter part of the eighth century.
These are negative arguments. Dr. Heurtley also draws

'
attention to a positive and express indication contained

'
in the document,not indeed of the precise time at which

'
it was written, but of the limit on the later side within

which it must have been written. Expounding the clause
"
in ver. 39 of the Quicimque mlt, Homo ex substantia
matris in saeculo natus," the commentator observes, "Idest,
'
in isto sexto milliario in qito mine siunus" Thus we learn
that the Commentary was written some time in the sixth
period of a thousand years from the Creation this being ;
unquestionably the meaning of the term tJie sixth military

or millenary. And this sixth millenary referred to by the
commentator must have terminated coincidently with the
eighth century of the Christian era. For what system of
chronology did the writer follow ? Clearly not that based
1
Heurtley, u. s. p. 13.
upon the Hebrew text of the Old Testament which placed

the Nativity of our Blessed Lord in the year of the world
3953) 'completis ab Adam annis 3953,' and therefore before

the termination of the fourth millenary, whereas he alludes
to it plainly as
occurring in the sixth. Then there were
the chronologies computed in accordance with the LXX
the Constantinopolitan, used by the Greeks, which assigned
the Nativity to the year 5509 from the Creation; the
Alexandrian, which assigned it to 5500 and that of ;
Eusebius, which assigned it to 5200. We cannot suppose

that the writer of the Commentary followed either the
first or second of these systems ;
had he done so, in either
case the Commentary must have been written previous to
the sixth century, and such an early date is inadmissible.
We must conclude therefore that he followed the Eusebian
chronology, as indeed, apart from the reason just stated,
appears probable for this mode of computation was
;
adopted by Orosius in the fifth century, by Bede early in

the eighth, and by Western theologians generally in the
middle ages.
Uponthese grounds Dr. Heurtley asserts that the year
799 A. D. is the limit on the later side within which the

'
Commentary must have been written.' And he adds :
'
But a writer conscious that he was on the extreme verge
of a period would hardly have expressed himself in such
'
a context as that above cited,
'
without some qualifying
word indicating its nearly approaching close. St. Augus-
tine in his De Civitate Dei, writing' at a considerable
'
distance of time from the close of the millenary, qualifies
"
hiscomputation in this way Ab ipso primo homine :
nondum sex millia annorum complentur." Elsewhere his

language is still more to the point ;
for discussing the
meaning of the thousand years in the Apocalypse, in which
Satan is said to be bound, he assigns this as one expla-

"
nation, Quia in ultimis annis mille ista res agitur, id est,
sexto annorum milliario, tanquam sexto die, cuius mine

" In
spatia posteriora volvtmtitr." Fortunatus says simply :
'
istosexto milliario, in quo nunc sumtis." The following is
the conclusion of his argument This note of time then,
:
'
furnished by Fortunatus himself, is an additional reason,

I do not hesitate to say a conclusive reason, even assuming
the latest possible period for the close of the sixth mil-
lenary, for believing his Commentary to have been written

earlier than the close of the year 799, and a very probable
reason, even on the same assumption, for believing it to
have been written considerably earlier ;
while it is perfectly
consistent with the supposition that it may have been
written earlier by two or three centuries.'
Before quitting this point it is desirable to notice the
clear distinction which exists between the sixth millenary,
sextzim milliariztm, and the sixth age, sexta aetas, the two
terms being sometimes confounded. Some of the Fathers,
especially St. Augustine, and after him Bede, divided the

whole period of the world's existence into six ages, cor-
responding with the six days of the Creation, and the six
stages of man's life : the first extending from the Creation
to Noah, the second from Noah to Abraham, the third
from Abraham to David, the fourth from David to the
carrying away to Babylon, the fifth from the carrying away
to Babylon to the first Advent, the sixth from the Birth of
Christ to His last coming at the end of the world. None
of these ages consisted of a thousand years the sixth :
obviously was of indefinite duration. This was clearly

distinct from the sixth milliary or millenary, which had the
recognized meaning of the sixth period of a thousand years

from the creation of the world, and in this sense it is
alluded to by St. Augustine in the second of the passages

above quoted. was a very familiar expression, because
It
in the belief of the Chiliasts it was the closing period of

l
the world's existence . Mention is occasionally found in
documents respecting events which occurred subsequently
to the eighth century as taking place in the sixth age.
The late Dr. Swainson, confounding the sixth age with the
sixth millenary, conceived such passages to be fatal to
Dr. Heurtley's argument. But they do not touch it.
The
point which wetohave been brought by Dr.
Heurtley's argument, it must be remembered, is this, that
the Commentary was written before the close of the eighth
century very probably a considerable time before, pos-

sibly as much as two or three centuries earlier. The
question is, how much earlier ? I think we may arrive at
a closer approximation on this point. In the first place,
by a similar argument to that by which Dr. Heurtley has
proved it to have been composed before the commencement

of the controversies respecting Adoptionism and the Pro-
cession of the Holy Spirit, it may be shown also to have
been produced before the Monothelete heresy attracted
attention.Commencing about the year A. D. 630, this con-
troversy was the prominent, almost absorbing, subject of
debate among theologians of the West as well as the East
during the remainder of the seventh century, and it had
not subsided in the early part of the following century.
Had the Commentary been
written during that period, it
could scarcely have failed to employ the peculiar termino-
logy then in vogue and to refer more or less emphatically

to the prevalent error of the age. For there are passages
in the Creed which would certainly invite, almost necessi-
tate, such reference. For instance, we have the following

1
See St. Aug. Ser. xciii. vii ;
also Bede, De Temporum rations, cap. Ixvii.
comment upon the verse,

'
Who although He be God and
man,' &c. :
{
Id est, duae substantiae in Christo, Deltas et
humanitas, non duae personae, sed una est persona.' While
thus asserting the two natures of Christ, the author, had
he been writing during the Monothelete controversy, would
naturally have gone on, in accordance with the wont of the
age, to assert also as a necessary corollary His two wills
and operations T Similarly in commenting on the words
.
'
perfect God and perfect man he would naturally have

'
insisted upon the two wills and two operations as needful

to the perfection of His two natures, for this was a current
2
argument of the epoch .
Again, when dwelling upon the
marked manner,
unity of our Lord's person, as he does in a
and as he was do by the repeated assertions of the
led to
doctrine in the Creed, the commentator would have
guarded himself against the inference which a Mono-

thelete opponent might have fastened upon him, had the
controversy in question been in agitation at the time. But
we find nothing of the kind : there is a marked absence
throughout the document of any of the critical terms used

Monotheletism, an absolute silence upon the
in reference to
subject. The necessary conclusion is that it was produced

before the rise of the controversy. That it emerged after
the controversy had passed away, we are precluded from
1
'In una persona domini nostri lesu Christi sicut duas naturas, ita et . . .
duas naturales volxmtates duasque naturales operationes eius regulariter confi-

temur.' Confession of Pope Agatho, A. D. 680 ; Hahn's Bibliothek der
Symbole, p. 285.
2 '
Ita quoque et duas naturales voluntates et duas naturales operationes
habere, utpote perfectutn perfectum hominem, unum eundemque
deum et
ipsum dominnm nostrum lesum Christum pietatis nos regula perstruit.' Con-
Synod of Milan,
fession of the A. D. 680 ;
ibid. p. 181. So also the Confession
of the Roman Synod of the same date ; ibid. p. 183. From the use not only of
these words, but of others as well, in the Athanasian Creed, I cannot avoid the
impression that, if not actually before the members of these synods, it must at
any rate have been familiar to their minds.
supposing by the reasonings of Dr. Heurtley. The above

argument is very much confirmed by the fact which I drew
attention to some years since, and which I must again
draw attention to now, that not fewer than three commen-
taries on the Athanasian Creed are extant which contain
marked and emphatic references to the Monothelete con-
troversy.
A further reason for believing this Commentary to be
than the Monothelete controversy is, that another
earlier
Commentary, which bears internal evidence of having been

composed at the time of that controversy, was in part
drawn from it and well-nigh founded upon it as its basis,
and consequently must have been of later date. As that
will be the next Commentary which will claim considera-
tion, it is needless to dwell upon it here.
Thus there are sufficient grounds, even though we cease

to attribute our Commentary to Venantius Fortunatus as
its author, for holding it to have been written not later
than the early part of the seventh century, possibly at the
close of the sixth. There appear to be no grounds for
assigning to it a higher antiquity; and we are precluded
from doing so if, as seems probable, it has drawn directly
in some passages from Venantius's Commentary on the
Apostles' Creed, which is believed to have been composed
soon after his migration into Gaul in 564 or 565.
The earliest known manuscript of this Commentary is.
preserved in the Bodleian Library, No. 25 of the Junius

MSS., and was assigned by Mr. Coxe, the late Librarian,
to the early part of the ninth century. The volume in
which it is contained comprises a great variety of docu-
ments, and several different
handwritings appear in it.
Our Commentary commences on p. 108 r., with the title
Expositio in fide Catholica ;
and it is immediately succeeded
by the Profession of Faith, here entitled Fides Catholica
Hieronymi, and this in turn by two expositions of the

Lord's Prayer. These are all in the same hand. collec- A
tion of hymns, ending with the Te Deum, follows, also
apparently in the same hand, or one very similar and ;
these, should be noted, are accompanied by an inter-

it
linear German gloss. It is needless to particularize further
the contents of the volume. On a blank space of fol. 33

of the Latin and German Vocabulary, which immediately
precedes the Expositio in fide Catholica, the following
dated appeal for the prayers of the readers of the book
'
appears Legentes in hoc libro oretis pro Reverendo

:
domino bartholomeo de andolo cuius industria pene dilapsus

renovatus est anno MCCCCLXI.' And on the old vellum
flyleaf at the end there is a similar appeal written by the
same hand thus :
'
Oretis legentes pro domino bartholomeo
de andolo morbacensi abbate.' Also on the old vellum
flyleaf at the beginning there is in the same handwriting
a brief and imperfect list of contents. These inscriptions
of the fifteenth century in all probability written by
Abbot Bartholomew himself, for had he been dead at the
time some intimation of the fact would have appeared
are very interesting for the light they throw upon the
history of the book, acquainting us with its ancient home

the abbey of Murbach or Morbach in Alsace, one of the
most considerable abbeys in Germany, and one of great
antiquity, having been founded in the year 731. The two
corresponding vellum flyleaves on which Abbot Bartho-
lomew's list of contents and his second request for the
prayers of his readers are written had evidently formed
part of a devotional book of earlier date, as may be judged
from the traces of handwriting which they bear, some of
them quite legible, and including a portion of the Office
N
for the Adoration of the Cross. Presumably the leaves

were used by him as a covering for the book,which he
found in a well-nigh shattered condition and repaired.
The of contents and his request for the prayers of his
list
readers are inserted in the blank spaces between the lines

of the earlier handwriting. Bartholomew de Andolo was
probably a member of the ancient noble family of Alsace
bearing the surname of Andlau, or Andelau, or Andlo,
which may have been derived from a synonymous small
town and castle situated upon a synonymous river in
1
Alsace .
Another manuscript copy, belonging to the ninth century,

of this Commentary, but imperfect, for it ends with the
nineteenth verse of the Creed 'veritate compellimur,'
is contained in a MS. of the Vienna Imperial Library,
No. 269 in Denis's Catalogue of Latin Theological Manu-
2
scripts' '. It follows immediately the Athanasian Creed
without any title. It is unnecessary to repeat here what
I have already said respecting the contents of that MS.
under the head of MS. copies of the Creed, No. 13. Why
the scribe did not complete the Commentary it is of course
impossible to divine but its fragmental condition does not
:
appear to be owing to the mutilation of the book, as

another document immediately follows. It may have been
simply the result of indolence.
The same fragment is also found in Laud, Codd. Miscel.
234, in the Bodleian Library, Oxford, a MS. of the twelfth
century. This, as several other of the Laud MSS., came
originally from the monastery of Eberbach or Ebbirbach,
near the Neckar in Baden, as we learn from a memorandum
'
on the last leaf Liber sancte Marie virginis in Ebbirbach
:
1
See Universal Lexicon, Halle, 1732.
2
Vol. i. Pars i.
pp. 962-966.
iv.] Commentaries or Expositions. 179
Deo gracias.' Denis's account of the Vienna MS. just

referred to, which is very full and minute, produces
the suspicion, I may rather say conviction, that it was the
original from which this Laud MS. was in a large measure
copied. This appears not only from the fact that all
the contents of the former codex, with the exception of the
Athanasian Creed, are found also in the latter in the same
order, but from a remarkable coincidence of details between
the two, and from some peculiarities in the latter which are
plainly accounted for upon the above-mentioned hypo-
thesis. The printed catalogue of the Laud MSS. is, I regret
to say, very misleading with regard to this particular

volume, not only describing wrongly the Athanasian Creed,
which it does not contain, as one of its contents, but also
omitting mention of the incomplete copy of our Com-
all
mentary, which it does contain.

Some years ago I found three copies of our Commentary
in the Bibliotheque Nationale at Paris, the first in the
Latin MS. 3826. of the end of the ninth century, the second
inLatin 17448 of the end of the tenth century, the third in
Latin 1008 also of the end of the tenth century. In the first
the Exposition commences on f. 143 with theExpo- title
'
sitio super fide catholica.' The volume belonged formerly

to the Abbey of St. Martial at Limoges. No. 17448 passed
into theRoyal Library from the College de Navarre at Paris.
On the flyleaf is a note stating that it is a literal transcript of
No. 2826 a statement of which I can confirm the correct-
ness as far as regards the Exposition. The Commentary
is the last in order of the contents, commencing on f. 116,
Isidorus de
'
the others according to the catalogue being :
Mysteriis Christi De concordia veteris et novi Testament!

luliani prognostica Dialogtis de Trinitate Alcuinus
ad Georgium Hierosol., ad Leonem Papam, ad amicos, ad
N 3
Karolum imperatorem Alcuini epitaphium.' In both these

MSS. the Commentary is incomplete, terminating with the
'
word rationem of the thirty-eighth verse of the Creed.
'
The third Paris MS., No. 1008, which was in the Colbert
collection before it was received into the Royal Library,
appears to have been a manual for the use and instruction
of priests. It begins with an exposition of the Canon of
'
the Mass. Then follows the canonical

'
inquisitio at epis-
'
copal visitations, headed, Qualiter requirendi sunt sacer-

dotes secundum canonicam institutionem.' In this the
priest required to make a statement of his faith, he

is
gives an exposition of the Lord's Prayer and Creed and ;
next comes the title in uncials,

{
De fide catholica,' to
which Quicunque vult salvus esse ante omnia
'
is subjoined,
opus est ut teneat catholicam fidem. Fides dicitur credu-
litas sive credentia catholica et cetera' the commencement
obviously of our Commentary. Hence a knowledge of it
would appear to have been a matter of canonical obliga-
tion : then follows an account of the various ecclesiastical
orders. The next document is
'
Breviarium ex nomine
'
apostolorum an account of the several Apostles with

reference to their feast-days. The next a dogmatic trea-
'
tise, Opusculum de essentia divinitatis Dei et de invisibili-
tatem adque inmensitatem eius et suam potentiam.' Next

our Commentary in extenso from f. 49 to f. 94, introduced
by the title, 'Expositio super fidem catholicam.' Next
'
an exhortation to priests commencing Fratres karissimi,
Spiritus Sanctus per prophetam sacerdotes et levitas et
omnes doctores ecclesiae catholicae admonet dicens': it
appears to be a cento of texts of Scripture. The last
documents are some Penitential Canons and Leidrad's

Treatise upon Baptism. In Appendix F to my work
Early History of the Athanasian Creed I have printed
collations made by me of the text of the Commentary

in these three Paris MSS.
In the year 1875 two other manuscript copies of this
Commentary were found by the Rev. W. D. Macray of

the Bodleian Library in the Library at Bamberg ;
one
of the ninth century or the beginning of the tenth having
the press mark A. n. 16, with the title Expositio fidei,' '
the other of the twelfth century with the press-mark Ed. or

B. ij. 16.
Other manuscript copies, as my friend the Rev. A. E.
Burn, Rector of Kynnersley in Shropshire, informs me, are
preserved in St. Gall. 27 and 341, both of the ninth century ;
others again in the Munich Library, in Cod. Lat. 19417

from the Tegernsee of the ninth century, the title
Abbey
'
being Expositio super fides catholica,' Cod. Lat. 3729 and

14508, both of the tenth, in the latter the title being De
'
Fide Catholica,' and Cod. Lat. 14501, of the twelfth. In

three of these, viz. St. Gall. 27 and Munich 3729 and 14501,
my informant tells me, the Commentary is incomplete.
Another copy is comprised in a MS. of the Ambrosian
Library at Milan, marked M. 79. This codex is a large
and bulky volume of 252 leaves written in double columns,
and it contains a great number and variety of documents.
It is ascribed to the eleventh century by a note on the
flyleaf,
'
Codex seculi XI. sive anno MVII. ut in fine
Kalendarii in tabella,' but the latter part could not have

been written before the commencement of the twelfth
century, as in the list of contents among the documents at
the end there are, '46. Concilium Florentinum sub Urbano II.
an. 1095'; also '50. Concilium Lateranense sub Paschal i
an. 1 1 12.' Our Commentary occurs early in the volume,

commencing on f. 36 v., and it is the last we may say of
a collection of commentaries or expositions, being preceded
1 82 Documentary Evidence. [CH.
by three expositions of the Apostles' Creed, the first, as

'
already mentioned, entitled Expositio a fortunato presby-

tero conscripta,' by three of the Lord's Prayer, and by
two of the Athanasian Creed, the first with the title Ex- '
positio fidei catholice,' the second without any title. The

title of the exposition, with which we are concerned at
present,
'
Item expositio fidei catholice; fortunati,' written
in rubric, occurs at the and the word for-
end of a line,
tunati is written above, apparently because there was no

room for it in the same line : it did not strike me as being
by a different hand, and the full stop following it, while

there is none after catholice, seems to show that it was not
a later addition. The Commentary ends on f.
38 v.,
with the rubric '
Explicit expositio fidei catholice.' The

following is immediately subjoined O beata, O gloriosa, :
'
O benedicta et amplectenda fides, quae humanum genus

sola vivificas, quod sola de diabolo triumphum reportas,
quae sola disperatis salvationis ianuam reseras tu sola :
terrenos homines cives angelorum facis: tu sola pro Deo
peregrinantibus celeste imperium tribuis : tu sola te aman-

tibus portas inferi claudis, et extinctis peccatis eos qui te
diligunt suo Creatori perpetuo letaturos coniungis.'

Lastly, Franciscus Antonius Zaccharia met with a copy
of this Commentary in a MS. of the fourteenth century
at Florence ;
but no author's name was added. This is
mentioned in his Excursus liter arius per

Italiam, p. 307.
The Milan MS. contains two passages from Alcuin and
two from Isidore, which are clearly later insertions, none of
them being known to occur in any earlier manuscript.
The two passages from Alcuin and one of the two from
Isidore appear to be found also in the Florence manuscript
of the fourteenth century, judging from Zaccharia's colla-
tions of the text.
This Commentary, so far as I am aware, was first printed

at Frankfort in 1610, in a little book entitled Manuale
Biblicum> a copy of which may be seen in the Bodleian

1
Library . The exposition is headed by the title, En-
phronii Presbyteri Expositio Fidei Catholicae S. A thanasii.
The anonymous editor says that he transcribed his text
from a codex of the St. Gallen monastery. The text follows
closely that of the Junius MS. in the Bodleian. This book

seems to explain the reference of Pareus in a passage
noticed by Waterland 2 where the former quotes some
,
'
words of our Commentary, as those of Euphronius Pres- .
byter in expositione huius Symboli Athanasii.' For my

knowledge of this book, as well as for the information
above mentioned respecting St. Gallen and Munich manu-
scripts, I am indebted to the Rev. E. A. Burn. Another
edition Commentary was produced by Muratori
of the
from the Milan MS. in his Anecdota ex Ambrosianae Biblio-
tkecae codicibus, Milan, 1679. A combined text from the
Milan and Junius MSS., discriminating their several read-
ings, was edited by Waterland in his Critical History of the
Athanasian Creed, published first in 1723. Waterland,
owing to his following Muratori, who was an inaccurate
editor, in several particulars misrepresents the Milan text.
In 1786 Luchi edited at Rome the works of Venantius
Fortunatus, with the Commentary subjoined, Zaccharia's

collations of the fourteenth century MS. being added in
the notes. This edition of Venantius, together with the
appendix, so to speak, containing the Commentary, ascribed
to him, has been reprinted in Migne's Patrologia Latina^
1
Manuale Biblicum sive Enchiridion S.S. Scripturae a Calholicae Apos-
tolicae veteris Ecclesiae Patrilnts compcndialum et mine primum ex vetitstis
membranis MSS. collectum. 1610, Francofurti, p. 76.
2
History of the Athanasian Creed, chap. iii.
torn. Ixxxviii. In our own age and country a transcript

of the Bodleian Junius text was printed by the late Pro-
fessor Swainson in his work on the Creeds, pp. 436-442 ;
and Professor Heurtley has edited the document in accord-

ance substantially with that text in the third edition of his
De fide et Symbolo.
2. The second Commentary on the Athanasian Creed, to
which wish to draw attention, was edited by me some
I
years ago from a MS. in the Troyes Public Library, together

with two other expositions from the same collection and
a fourth from the Bibliotheque Nationale at Paris 1 and for ,
the convenience of distinction I described it as the Troyes
Commentary. As no other printed copy of this important

document is extant to the best of my knowledge, and the
book in which it appeared may not be met with readily
2
now, I think it better to reprint it in the present volume .
The codex Troyes 804 containing it I believe the only

ancient manuscript which is known to contain it is a thick
4to volume of 243 leaves, written according to the printed
catalogue in the ninth or tenth century, but in the opinion
of the present Librarian in the latter, intended apparently
as a of dogmatic theology for the use of some
compendium
monastery, and comprising twenty-four documents in all,
among which, besides works of St. Augustine, Fulgentius,
Theodulf are the Confession of Faith commonly described
as Fides Hieronymi, two expositions of the Lord's Prayer,
the first being the work of St. Augustine, three exposi-
tions of the Apostles' Creed, and of these also the first
isby Augustine, and two of the Quicunque*. This

St.
MS. prior to the French Revolution belonged to the

1
2
Early History of the Athanasian Creed, Appendix. Appendix F.
3
Catalogue des Mamiscrits des Bibliotheqtics Publiques, torn. ii.
pp. 334-
336.
College de 1'Oratoire at Troyes, into which it passed from

the collection of the learned Pithou, who was a native of
that place. So
appears from the note
it :
'
De la Biblio-
theque du College de 1'Oratoire de Troyes. Ancien fonds

de Pithou.'
The Commentary with which we are concerned at present
is the first of the two expositions of the Athanasian Creed,
and is entitled Expositio fidei Catholicae. Apparently it
has for one of its sources the Commentary of Fortunatus

so-called. In the earlier portion the connexion is close and
obvious, sometimes literal, and this is the case particularly
at the commencement. In the latter partj relating to the
Incarnation, this is not so obvious ; still, a similarity of
thought is traceable,and here and there the language

of the earlier Commentary crops up in the later. But they
are distinct documents, each containing much which is not
to be found in the other. A
long passage for instance
towards the end respecting the identity of the risen body and
the last judgement is peculiar to the Troyes Commentary,
as well as another concerning Monotheletism which we
shall immediately refer to.
In this, as in the preceding case, the authorship being

uncertain can afford no clue to the date of the document.
External evidence is a guide to a certain extent upon
the point, enabling us to fix the limit on the later side of the
period within which it must have been composed. Thus

we are led to determine this to the eighth century by
the fact that the Commentary at present before us, like the
previous one, was one of the sources from which the Com-
mentary attributed to Theodulf, lately brought to light,
was drawn, this last being certainly a work of the ninth
century, not later. For proof that such was the case in
two instances I must refer to my notice of the latter

1
Commentary . But we have a closer indication of date
from internal evidence an emphatic and express repudia-

in
tion of the Monothelete heresy and this clearly points to

:
the inference that it was drawn up some time during the
prevalence of the controversy on that subject, which com-

menced soon after the year 630, culminating in the sixth
Oecumenical Council in 68 1, and not ceasing entirely
until nearly 720. Then it died away, and the subject of
image- worship became for a while the absorbing topic of
theological discussion. It has never been revived. The
conclusions of the Sixth Council have been tacitly accepted,
The two wills and two
rather than continually reasserted.
operations of our BlessedLord have not been insisted upon

with the same explicitness as His two natures, the latter
being assumed to imply the former. Thus Alcuin, who
died A. D. 804 the leading theologian of the age of Charle-
magne in his work De fide S. Trinitatis is perfectly silent

respecting the two wills, although he carefully maintains
the verity of the two natures, divine and human, in the
unity of our Lord's Person. The compiler of the Troyes

Commentary on the other hand, in declaring his faith in
the two natures and forms and nativities of Christ, deems it
necessary to add that he believes also in the two wills and

operations in the unity of His Person Duas quippe in:
'
Christo credimus esse naturas duasque formas duasque

nativitates, duas etiam voluntates atque operationes in
singularitatem personae.' Moreover, he goes on to adduce
the Scriptural authorities for the doctrine of the two wills
and operations, as well as of the two nativities. This
declaration of faith and these arguments, distinctively
characteristic of the Monothelete controversy, lead us to
believe that the Commentary was compiled during that
1
See section No. 7 of this chapter.
controversy, and probably when it was at its height

between A. D. 549, when the prevalent heresy was condemned
at the Lateran Synod under Martin I, and A. D. 68 1, when
it was finally condemned by the sixth Oecumenical Synod
held at Constantinople. We are confirmed in so thinking
by the fact that the Oratorian and Bouhier Commentaries

which will be noticed next employ language drawn from
the definition adopted by the last-named synod for the
purpose of repudiating the Monothelete hypothesis. Had

the Troyes Commentary been composed after that Synod,
we may presume it would have done the same. Further,
our document contains nothing inconsistent with this con-
clusion respecting the epoch which produced it in its present
form. For it exhibits no traces of the terminology peculiar
to the several theological controversies of the two suc-
ceeding centuries. At the close of the eighth century and

the early part of the ninth the mind of Western Christendom
was deeply agitated respecting Adoptionism, and works
written at the time, as those of Alcuin for instance, are
replete with the subject ;

but not the faintest notice of it
occurs here we find none of the critical language in

common use among theologians of that age. In the
middle of the ninth century Predestination was the topic
of vehement discussion in Gaul and Germany had this :
Commentary, which was probably written in one of those

countries, been produced then, we might have expected to
find in it the distinctive terms which the debates elicited,
especially as the very explicit references to the final con-

dition of the elect and the reprobate would naturally occa-
sion, if not induce, the use of such terms ;
but they are
conspicuous by their absence ;

the writer contents himself
with repudiating the errors of Origenism. The attention
of Western theologians was directed to the doctrine of the
Procession of the Holy Spirit contemporaneously with

Adoptionism in the latter half of the eighth century and
the beginning of the ninth : in our document the doctrine
is more than once, as held and taught by the Western
stated
Church, but it is only stated incidentally and naturally,
not dwelt nor enlarged upon nor made the subject of
argument or comment or of reference to authorities,

as would be the case in a time of controversy upon the
subject ;
no appeal is made in reference to it as there
is in reference to the two wills, divine and human, of
our Lord.
3. The other Commentary on the Athanasian Creed,

contained in the Troyes MS. No. 804, follows immediately
after that last noticed, and is introduced by the heading
'
Item alia expositio.' It is constructed upon a distinctly
different type. The whole Creed is quoted verse by verse,
and to each verse a comment is subjoined. This exposition

is describedby author as
its being drawn from earlier
sources, and that not only in respect of the matter, but the
very language. I have myself been able to verify many of
the passages employed in the compilation, and I have no
doubt that any person more learned in the Fathers than
I can pretend to be would succeed in verifying several
more. The sources which I have identified are as
follows : St. Augustine, Tractatus in lohannis Evangelium,
De Trinitate, De praesentia Dei, Lib. con. Maximinum,
Epis. ad Volusiamim, De Genesi ad Literam Prosper, ;
Liber sententiarmn ex Augustino ;

St. Leo, Epistles ad
Flavianum and ad Constantinopolitanos ;
St. Cyril of
Alexandria, Synodical Epistle translated by Dionysius
Exiguus Fulgentius,
;
Liber de Fide ad Petrum Pela- ;
gius 1, Epistle to Childebert Vigilius Tapsensis, Contra

;
Entychetem and De veritate Trinitatis ; Hieronymi Fides

so-called ;
and the Definition of the Sixth Oecumenical
Council according to the old Latin translation. St. Augus-
tine's writings are evidently the principal source. The
Definition of the Sixth Council seems to be the latest
document which was drawn from. There is indeed much
resemblance as regards thought and matter, and in a few
passages a verbal correspondence, between this Commentary
and Alcuin's treatise De fide SS. Trinitatis. But this is
clearly the consequence of both works being derived from

the same sources. Alcuin was not an original writer,
and borrowed largely from his predecessors, especially
St. Augustine and in no case is there any reason for sup-
;
posing that the commentator drew from him directly on :
the contrary, it is evident that such was not the fact,

as I have pointed out in my notes on the text of the
Commentary printed in the Appendix.

As this, like the Troyes Commentary, contains an
express repudiation of the Monothelete controversy, the
arguments which I adduced for referring the latter docu-
ment to the period during which the controversy on that
subject was carried on as the probable epoch of its pro-
duction will apply with equal force to the former. Only
the former, i. e. the exposition at present under our con-
must have been constructed subsequently to the
sideration,
Sixth Council, the very language of which it adopts for
repudiating the heresy. We may therefore believe it to
have been composed some time between A. D. 681, when
the Sixth General Council was held, and the close of
the Monothelete controversy at the end of the seventh
or the commencement of the eighth century.
For convenience sake I shall describe this commentary
in future as 'the Oratorian Commentary,' a title which
I applied to it when I first published it in memory of the
circumstance that the MS. from which it was printed

belonged to the College de 1'Oratoire at Troyes. It is
reprinted in Appendix G of the present volume.

Our document has been also preserved in a MS. of the
Vatican Library, having for its press-mark No. 331, lat.
Reginensis. From this codex it has been twice edited,
first by Pinius in the second volume of his Liturgia
Antiqtia Hispanica, Gothica, Isidoriana, Mozarabica, Tole-

tana, Mixta, printed at Rome in the year 1746 ;
and
secondly at a more recent date by Cardinal Mai in his
Scriptorum veteriim nova collectio, torn. ix. .p. 369. The

former of these editors in regard to the date of the MS.
f '
says scriptus videtur IX. vel x. saeculo ;

the latter places
it about the eleventh century, ex codice saeculi circiter
'
XI.' Arevalus in his Isidoriana, or preface to his edition

of Isidore of Seville, gives some account of the MS. and
assigns it to the tenth century. Professor Jones, of

St. Beuno's a pamphlet on the Athanasian
College, in
Creed published in 1872, stated that in the opinion of
Professor Bollig, described by him as one of the most
'
learned members of the Society of Jesus and an official writer

in the Vatican Library/ that portion of the MS. which
contains this Commentary was written in the beginning of
the eleventh or in the tenth century. Considering this
variety of opinion on the subject we may fairly set the date
at the tenth century.
Professor Bollig's opinion was based upon a special
examination of the MS., and his mention of that portion '
'
of the MS. which contains our Commentary no doubt has

reference to the fact of its being clearly distinguished by
the handwriting and other circumstances from the first
forty leaves of the volume which contain works of Prosper

and Cassiodorus, and from the concluding leaves which
comprise the Apocalypse. Probably the three portions

did not originally belong to the same book, and were only
united together by the modern binder after they reached
the Vatican ;
so at least it would appear from the Papal
arms being stamped upon the binding. The Commentary
on the Athanasian Creed is immediately preceded by
one on that of the Apostles' commencing Quando beatum '
legimus Paulum,' and it is followed by a short tractate

having for its subject 'quomodo intelligendum est illut
quod deuteronomium scriptum est ego sum dominus.'

in libro
In the same portion with it are included also works of

Alcuin and Isidore of Seville and an exposition of the
Lord's Prayer. The Commentary on the Quicunque is
introduced without any title, so that the title ascribed to
'
it by Mai, Symbol! Athanasiani explanatio,' is not found
in the MS. From the character of the handwriting, which
by Arevalus as clarus Gallicus,' the book
'
is described
would appear to have been written in Gaul it may have :
belonged to the celebrated Abbey of Fleury on the Loire,

the original home of many of the MSS. in the Alexan-
drina or Reginensis collection of which it forms a part.
This collection, which was founded by Christina Alexandra,
Queen of the Swedes, was added to the Vatican Library
in 1690.
Commentary in the Vatican Reginensis

Prefixed to our
MS. a
isshort preface by the author, which for more
'reasons than one deserves special consideration. It is
addressed obviously to his Bishop, who, he says, had en-

joined him for the benefit of the presbyters of the diocese,
parrochiae nostrae,' who were in great want of books, so
'
much so that it was difficult for them to obtain even such

as were required for the celebration of Sacraments and
Offices, viz. a Psalter, Lectionary and Missal, to draw up in
the words of the holy Fathers sanctorum patrum sen- '
'
tentiis an exposition of that little work of the Faith

'
illud fidei opusculum,' the Quicunqtte vult clearly which
was recited churches here and there, and was studied by
in
the presbyters of the diocese more than other similar works.

The exposition thus drawn from the Fathers it was the
Bishop's wish that the clergy should be compelled to study ;
and would be very helpful in promoting a knowledge

it
of the Faith. The little work of the Faith was ascribed

by tradition to the most blessed Athanasius, by whom it
was intended to be a bulwark of defence for Catholics against
the assaults of Arianism. He i. e. the author of the Com-
mentary had always seen it so ascribed in old manu-
' '
scripts in veteribus codicibus by the title written at

the head. This document is so important that I have
thought it desirable to reprint it in Appendix H. It does
not appear in the
Troyes MS., the scribe having passed it
over probably for the sake of brevity as not forming part
of the exposition. Its authenticity as the preface to the
Oratorian Commentary does not admit of doubt. We
have proof of this not only in its being found in the Vatican
MS., but also in the fact that the latter part of it, com-
mencing with the words quod a beatissimo
'
Traditur
Athanasio,' forms the introduction to another Commentary
on the Athanasian Creed which was largely drawn from
the Oratorian, viz. the Bouhier, the next in order to be
noticed.
In this preface there are two particulars which seem to
me to add confirmation to the early date assigned by me
to the Oratorian Commentary. In the first place, the
lamentable state ofclerical ignorance and the great scarcity
of books necessary for the celebration of Divine Service,

which the author describes as existing in his own time and
diocese, indicate a state of things which could not be sup-

posed at all likely to have existed in any country where
this Commentary might have been produced during the

ninth century, nor yet some years prior to its commence-
ment. Under the fostering care of Charlemagne there was
a revival of literature, especially sacred literature, through
the wide extent of his dominions the art of calligraphy;
was improved, and its practice more largely cultivated.

That scarcity of ecclesiastical books which is emphasized
in this preface could scarcely have found place in his time
nor that of his descendants, when books were multiplied,
sometimes written with a high degree of skill and elabora-
tion, as we know by some specimens which have survived
the wreck of ages. Moreover, in the ninth century every
presbyter was under obligation to provide himself with the
necessary books for Divine Service. Thus in the Admo-
'
nitio synodalis/ beforementioned, or episcopal instruction

and charge so to speak, which according to Baluze was
read once every year to the clergy in Synod either by the
bishop in person or by the deacon in his presence, and

that universally in Western Christendom, and which in his
opinion existed before the time of Pope Leo IV, to whom

itis attributed in some MSS., but wrongly, as he thinks,
being in substance as old, or nearly as old, as the time of

St. Boniface or the middle of the eighth century, every
presbyter is ordered to have in his possession a Missal,
Lectionary, and Antiphonary
l
. And in the
'
Inquisitio/
or, so to speak, episcopal visitation articles of inquiry, the
corresponding document to the Admonitio,' inasmuch as

'
it contains the same particulars, only in the form of inquiry
1
See notes of Baluze upon Regino in Migne, Patrol. Lat. torn, cxxxii. pp.
52 l -534- Also Admonitio synodalis antiqua ia Appendix ii. to Regino, u. s.,
PP- 45S-45 8 -
O
instead of direction, inquiry is made of each presbyter

whether he possesses the same books. In the Statutes of
Riculfus, Bishop of Soissons in France, late in the ninth cen-
tury a larger collection of service books is required. What

is to be noticed here is first, that if the clergy in the ninth
century were under obligation to provide themselves with

the books requisite for the celebration of Sacraments and
Offices, then the difficulty of doing so could not have been
so great as it appears from the preface to the Oratorian
Commentary to have been at the time when that document
was drawn up. And next it is to be noticed that the
Antiphonary was included among the books necessary for
presbyters to possess, and which they were therefore under
ecclesiastical obligation to provide themselves with in the
ninth century, and probably some time before. Had the
Oratorian Commentary been composed during that period,
the preface would have included that book together with
a Missal, Lectionary, and Psalter among the books neces-
sary for the clergy. But no mention is made of it, and

the necessary inference is that the Commentary belongs to
an earlier epoch. It is remarkable that neither in the
' ' '
Admonitio nor the '
Inquisitio is there mention of a

Psalter as ordered and required together with a Missal,
Lectionary, and Antiphonary. Possibly as in these docu-
ments the presbyters were ordered and required to recite
the Psalter word for word by heart together with the
Canticles usually subjoined to it, the express mention of
the book, the possession of which was necessary to enable
them thus to acquit themselves, was deemed superfluous.
That Psalters were plentiful enough in the early part of
the ninth century there can be no reasonable doubt. In
the Statutes of Riculfus the Psalter and Antiphonary are
both mentioned among the books which the clergy were
required to possess. The second particular in this preface

which appears to me indicative of an early date is that
it speaks of the Athanasian Creed as being at the time
recited in churches here and there only in some places
and dioceses, not in others in some districts, perhaps

;
provinces, not in others if this is the correct meaning

of passim in mediaeval Latin whereas we have reason
;
to believe that in Gaul and Germany at least, in one of

which countries the Commentary was in all probability
composed, the Creed was very generally if not univer-
sally used in the service in the early part of the ninth
century.
4. The next Commentary which claims consideration is
that to which applied the title for convenience sake of

I
the Bouhier Commentary, from the name of the former

owner of the Troyes MS. through which I first became
acquainted with the document. This Commentary has
a close connexion with the Oratorian, a great part of which
is reproduced in it in an abbreviated and condensed form.
At the same time it is a distinct document, more than
a mere abridgment of the Oratorian exposition, inasmuch
as besides the matter derived from that source it contains
also much which is not to be found there at all. Such
being the relation of these two expositions, as I venture to
think I have fully shown upon a former occasion 1 the ,
Bouhier must necessarily be the later, and the commence-

ment of the eighth century may be fixed as the limit before
which could not have been drawn up.
it On the other
hand, as it contains an abstract of the passage in the
Oratorian relating to Monotheletism, we are led to believe
that it was composed before the memory of the controversy
1
Early History of the Athanasian Creed, by G. D. W. Ommanney,
pp. 14-22.
O 2
relating to that heresy had died away. Hence the date of

the work may with probability be placed between A.D. 710
and A.D. 750.
In this, as in the Oratorian Commentary, the whole of the
Creed is quoted successively, each passage being followed
by appropriate note or comment.
its It is preceded by
a short prologue, which commences with the words Tra-

'
ditur quod a beatissimo Athanasio,' and is in point of fact

the latter part of the Oratorian prologue, the first part
being omitted as clearly suitable only to the exposition

from which it was originally written.
Our document is found in two MSS. of the Troyes
Library. The earliest of these numbered 1979 in the
catalogue is assigned to the tenth century. From a note
written on the flyleaf Codex MS. Bibliothecae Buherianae,
'
F. 14, MDCCXXI.' we learn that it belonged formerly to

the collection of the Bonnier family, which was transferred
to Troyes from Dijon. It is remarkable that in this codex
our Commentary is attributed to St. Augustine by the
'
title which heads it, as follows :
Incipit expositio sancti
Augustini Fidei sancti Athanasii Episcopi in veneratione
Sanctissime Trinitatis individuaeque Unitatis omnipotentis-
simi universitatis Dei.' Whatever may have been the cause
which induced the scribe thus to assign the authorship of
thisCommentary whether it was that he found it mixed
up with genuine works of the great Latin Father, or
whether it was owing to its being so deeply impregnated
with his teaching, or to its adopting so largely his very
language the fact is notable as tending to confirm our
belief that it is a work of the eighth century. It cannot be
supposed that he would have attributed a contemporaneous
or recent work to a writer who had died five centuries
before. The following note in reference to the title appears
in the MS. in the handwriting of a former owner, Bouhier :
'
Symbolum fidei sub Athanasii nomine editum sed . . .
cuius est ista in hoc symbolum expositio sub S. Augustini

larva publicata? Ego facile crediderim illam esse ipsius
Vigilii V
This conjecture of Bouhier respecting the author-
ship clearly is not less untenable than the attribution of it
by the writer of the MS. The fact of the Commentary
containing a passage from the Definition of the Sixth
Oecumenical Council is alone a proof that it was not com-
piled either by Augustine or Vigilius. Besides our docu-
ment, which occurs first in the order of contents. Troyes
1979 comprises works of Alcuin, Rhabanus Maurus, and

St.Augustine. It appears also in another Troyes MS.
No. 1533, assigned to the twelfth century where it is

'
immediately preceded explanatio Symboli

by Incerti
'
beatum legimus Paulum
'
Apostolici commencing Quando

' '
apostolum and Fides sancti Hieronymi presbyteri,' other

contents being Sancti Gregorii liber pastoralis,' works of
'
Prosper and St. Augustine, and Orosii questiones et re-

'
2
sponsiones Augustini .' It is introduced by the title
'
Expositio fidei catholice Sancti Athanasii episcopi.' Both

of these are well-written MSS. and in good condition. The
latter, like No. 804 in the same library, belonged previously
to the French Revolution at the close of the last century to
the College d'Oratoire at Troyes. A third manuscript copy
of the same epoch as the last-mentioned is preserved in the
Public Library at St. Omer 3 . In this volume it is interest-
ing to notice that the Commentary preceded by the same

is
two documents as in Troyes 1532, and it is followed by

'
Orosii questiones,' another of the contents of that codex.
Another manuscript copy is deposited in the British Museum
1
Catalogue des Manuscrits des Bibliothtques publiques, torn. ii.
pp. 810, 8u .
2 3
Ibid. pp. 644, 645. Ibid. torn. iii.
pp. 302, 303.
No. 24902 of the Additional MSS. This manuscript, as

Sir E. M. Thompson informed me, may be dated about A.D.
TOOO: he assigns it to the early part of the eleventh century,
but thinks might belong to the tenth and he believes it
it :
to have been written in France. A

former owner coincided
with this opinion in regard to the date, as appears by the
following note on the flyleaf L'ecriture me parait etre
'
:
du xi, sinon du x.' In this codex our document is entitled

'
Expositio fidei catholicae,' and it is immediately preceded

by the exposition of the Apostles' Creed commencing
Quando beatum legimus Paulum apostolum,' which is here
'
'
attributed to St. Augustine by the title Explanatio beati
Augustini episcopi de Symbolo Apostolico.' It also con-

'
tains
'
Interrogationes Orosii and works of SS. Augustine,

Jerome, Ambrose, Gregory the Great.
It is interesting to notice that the same Commentary on
the Apostles' Creed, which is found in three of these four

MSS. containing the JBouhier Commentary, is also found in
the Vatican MS. Reg. 231, immediately preceding the
Oratorian Commentary, from which, as I have pointed out,
the Bouhier was largely drawn. What was the cause of
this associationbetween the exposition of the Apostles'
Creed on the one hand, and the two kindred expositions of
the Athanasian on the other, it is of course impossible to
say for certain. Possibly all three were compiled in the

same monastery. There can be no doubt that the Vatican
MS. was written in Gaul, as the MSS. containing the
Bouhier appear to have been also. And the Commentary
on the Apostles' Creed may have been a work of the same
epoch as the Oratorian, or even earlier. For the former
has for its subject-matter an early type of the Creed giving
the article on the Incarnation in the form qiti natus est
de Spiritu Sancto et Maria virgine, and passing over the
words mortuus and sanctorum communionem from which ;

it
may be inferred that was certainly not drawn up later than

it
the eighth century, and may have been drawn up earlier.

This Commentary I have also thought it desirable to
reprint in the present volume l
,
the volume in which I pub-
lished it being now I fear difficult to meet with.
5. Another Commentary, which I have also reproduced

in the Appendix 2 was transcribed by me from a MS. in
,
the Bibliotheque Nationale at Paris Latin 1013 assigned
by the old printed catalogue to the ninth century, but by

Monsieur Delisle to the commencement of the succeeding
century. The manuscript belonged formerly to the Abbey
of St. Martial at Limoges, and from its contents would
appear to have been intended as a manual for the use of
priests, for it contains, besides the document under our con-

Expositio ceremoniarum Baptismi," Evangelium
'
sideration,
cum homilia S. Gregorii Papae,' Instructio sacerdotum
'
' '
super sacramenta,' Expositio Missae,' Expositio super

Symbolum,' Canon Silvestri Papae,' Sermones de Nativi-
' '
tate Domini/ Sermo S. Augustini, qui est potius Caesarii,'

'
'
Admonitio B. Gregorii Papae,' Sermo exhortatorius/ and '
Homilia Augustini episcopi.' The Commentary on the

'
S.
Athanasian Creed follows immediately that upon the

Apostles' Creed, and it is introduced by the title, Incipit
'
fides chatolica (sic] cum exposicione.' Like the two exposi-
tions last noticed, it quotes the various verses of the Creed

in succession, but as regards its subject-matter differs from
them, as also from the Troyes Commentary, entirely, being
of a more simple and elementary character. And this
greater simplicity may be naturally regarded as an indica-
tion of greater antiquity; but in its present form the
exposition cannot be prior to the commencement of the

1 2
Appendix I. Note J.
seventh century, as it includes a passage from the writings

of Gregory the Great who died A. D. 604. Still, many of
the notes which it contains may have existed at an earlier

date. On the other hand, as the MS. belongs to the
beginning of the tenth century, and it is perfectly clear

from the corruptions and errors with which the text
abounds that it was copied from an earlier codex, it is
impossible to suppose that the Commentary was compiled

later than the the ninth century. Thus the
latter part of
commencement of the seventh century and the close of the

ninth are the limits on either side of the period within
which the compilation of this document must be placed.
The text is remarkable for the grammatical peculiarities,
or rather barbarisms, found in it, as well as its corruptions :
how far the former were due to the copyist, and how far to
the author of the document, it is of course impossible to
say. But the exposition is itself remarkable and deserving

of attention in connexion with the history of the Quicunque,
apart from this particular copy of it. When I first drew

attention to it, I described it as the Paris Commentary for
convenience sake, and I shall continue to refer to it by that
title.I am not aware of any manuscript copy of it extant
besides that at Paris. It only remains to add that the

marginal notes to the Quicunqtie in the interesting tenth-
century Psalter in the British Museum Reg. 2. B. V.
which was certainly written in England; were for the most
part drawn from this exposition as their source.
In printing this Commentary it has been my endeavour
to follow as closely as possible the text of the MS. in all
its peculiarities of spelling and diction, but the contractions
and punctuation I have not attempted to reproduce. And
this has been my rule in regard to the other Commentaries
which are printed in the Appendix.
In his Diatribe de Symbolo Quictmque, which was first

6.
published in the second volume of his edition of the works

of Athanasius in 1698, Montfaucon printed 'ex codice
Bibliothecae sancti Germani a Pratis numero 199 quingen-
'
torum annorum a Commentary on the Athanasian
circiter
Creed entitled Tractatus cle Fide Catholica V There

'
cannot be the least doubt that the Latin MS. No. 13020
of the Bibliotheque Nationale at Paris is identical with this
codex. It is assigned to the twelfth century, and has
among its contents the Commentary edited by Montfaucon,

and on the page appears the note S. Germani a pratis,
first
showing that the Abbey of St. Germain de Pres was its

original home. The other contents of the MS. are some
works of Bede and St. Jerome and St. Augustine.
The same Commentary was edited by Pinius in the
second volume of his Liturgia Antigua Hispanica, Gothica,
Isidoriana, Mozarabica, Toletana^ Mixta, published at Rome
in 1746. The title he states to be according to the MS.
'
(sic] de
Expositio Athasii fide '; but this is all the informa-
tion he supplies in regard to the source from which his text
was derived. In all probability the MS. was deposited in

the Vatican or some other Library at Rome. Our document
is printed in the same volume with the Oratorian Com-
mentary, and immediately after it and hence the late ;
Dr. Swainson inferred that it was contained in the same

MS., viz. MS. Reg. Alex. 231. That such is
the Vatican
not the case can testify from my own knowledge. Pinius
I
describes these two documents as more precious than gold

and jewels.
The following MSS. may also be mentioned as containing
our document :
British Museum, Addit. 18043, of the tenth century

1
S. Athanasii Opera, torn. ii.
p. 735. Paris, 1698.
a Psalter followed by the Canticles of the Old and New

Testaments, a Litany, the Lord's Prayer, the Apostles'
Creed, and lastly the Athanasian Creed, entitled Fides
'
Catholica Sancti Athanasii,' with this Commentary.

The book belonged originally to the important abbey of
Stavelot in the Ardennes near Liege, as appears by a
memorandum on the first leaf, 'Liber monasterii Stabu-
lensis,' and another in a later hand on f.
187,
'
Psalterium
glossatum spectans ad monasterium sancti Remacli Sta-

bulensis.'
Bodleian Library, Laud Lat. 17, a Psalter written in the

twelfth century in three columns, the text in the centre, the
notes on each side. After the usual Old Testament
Canticles the Athanasian Creed follows, entitled '
Fides
sancti Athanasii episcopi'catholica,' together with the notes
forming our Commentary, and next a Litany and Prayers.

It is remarkable that there are no New Testament Canticles :
the Lord's Prayer, and the Apostles' Creed, and the
apocryphal I5ist Psalm are also wanting. The volume has

been mutilated at the beginning, the commencing words
being
'
meum et exultavit lingua mea '
of the fifteenth Psalm,

or sixteenth in our version. It is interesting to notice that
this is an English book, as appears from the fact of the
Litany containing invocations to English saints, and some

legal documents written at the end show that it belonged
to the abbey at Cirencester.
A
very complete and richly decorated Psalter in the
Library of Trinity College, Cambridge bearing the press-
mark R. 17. i also of the twelfth century, and assigned
1
by Wanley in his description of it to the reign of Stephen .
It is a triple Psalter Gallican, Roman, and Hebraic with

1
Humfredi Wanleii . . .
catalogus historico-criticus. Oxon. 1705, pp. 168,
169.
notes and prefaces and prayers referring to each Psalm.

In addition to the Latin marginal notes or comments
the Roman Psalter has also an interlinear gloss or version
described by Wanley as Normanno- Saxon; and the Hebraic
Psalter has an interlinear gloss or version described by
him as Normanno-G attic. The Psalter is followed by the
Canticles, first the usual Old Testament Canticles, and then
Canticum trium puerorum, Te Deum, Benedictus, Magni-
ficat, Nunc dimittis, Gloria in excelsis, Pater noster,
Symbolum Apostolorum, Quicunque vzilt, and the apo-

cryphal i5ist Psalm, all of these being equipped with
notes as well as Normanno- Saxon and Norm anno- Gallie
glosses or versions. As with the other documents, so in

the case of the Athanasian Creed the linguistic versions
are written between the lines, the notes in the margin.
These notes constitute our Commentary. Neither the
Creed nor its Commentary has any title. At the end of
the book appears a picture of the monk by whom it was
written and decorated Eadwin of Christ Church or the
Cathedral at Canterbury. This then may be believed to
have been the original home of the volume. I must add
that in the arrangement of the Canticles in the volume as
it is sight to be great
at present, there appears at first
confusion. This, however, is

evidently the consequence of
a transposition of some of the leaves, and my examination
of the book convinced me that they must have stood
originally in the order above stated. The same Canticles
&c. and in the same order are found in the Utrecht Psalter.
The coincidence evidently suggests a connexion between
the two Psalters, especially considering the very unusual
position assigned in both to the apocryphal I5ist Psalm,

which almost invariably occurs after the i5oth. I doubt if
any other instance can be produced of its being placed after
the Canticles. Again, every Psalm and Canticle in both

these Psalters is preceded by an illustrative drawing ; and
the drawings are the same in both, only in the Eadwin
Psalter they are better finished and they are coloured. Must
it not have been, that when Eadwin the monk wrote and
decorated his magnificent book, he had the Utrecht Psalter
before him? It is impossible to help thinking so with
such evidences before us of a close connexion between the

two books.
Balliol College, Oxford, No. 32 assigned to the end of
the twelfth century. In this volume the Athanasian Creed
with its Commentary immediately follows the usual Old
Testament Canticles, which are also accompanied by notes
or comments. Neither the Canticles nor Creed have any
titles. The documents which precede the Canticles are
described by the list of contents written on the modern
'
flyleaf as Augustini prologus in Psalmos,' and Petrus

Cantor Parisiensis in Psalmos.' By a memorandum on
the old vellum flyleaf it appears that the book was the gift
of William Gray, Bishop of Ely from 1454 to 1478, who
was a considerable benefactor to Balliol College. Before
his appointment to the bishopric he was the King's Pro-
curator at Rome.
St. John's College,Oxford, No. 101, erroneously printed
31 in Waterland's Critical History of the Athanasian Creed,
Oxford edition, 1870, p. 50. The MS. is assigned by the
Catalogue, which was drawn up by the late Mr. Coxe, to
the thirteenth century. The two documents preceding the
Athanasian Creed with its gloss or comment are, according
to this Catalogue,
'
S. Marci evangelium cum glossa instruc-
tum,' and 'S.Lucae evangelium quoad capita XIII. priora cum
'
glossa instructum': it is followed by Symbolum SS.Apos-

tolorum cum glossa,'
'
Expositio in Orationem Dominicam,'
some sermons of St. Augustine, and other documents, the
last being
'
S. lohannis evangelium cum glossis. Deficit in
cap. VII. verbis tcmptis meum nondum impletum est* The

Athanasian Creed with its gloss or comment commences
on folio 1
27 ;
and that, as well as the Apostles' Creed and
Lord's Prayer, with their comments, is written in a different
hand from the rest of the volume, and in three columns,
the text in the centre, the gloss or notes at the sides, but
occasionally inserted between the lines of the text. The

Quicunque and its comment are introduced without any
title,being probably copied from a Psalter. The latter is
clearly identical with that which occurs in the MSS. just
mentioned, and which was edited by Montfaucon and
Pinius.
I am informed by my friend the Rev. A. E. Burn that
there is another manuscript copy of our Commentary in
the Cathedral Library at York. It has for its press-mark
xvi. 7. 4 and is
; assigned to the beginning of the thirteenth
century. This must be the MS. which was seen by Water-
land, described by him as a copy of Bruno.
And there yet another copy, as the same friend informs
is
me. in the Cathedral Library at Durham. This is stated

to be of the twefth century.
The Commentary at present under our notice has been
hitherto confounded with that which appears in the Psalter
drawn up by Bruno, Bishop of Wurzburg. But although
the two documents have a general resemblance which
proves a mutual connexion, there are numerous and notable
diversities between them, by which they may be clearly
discriminated. The following difference may be especially

mentioned three passages, clearly drawn from the Com-
:
mentary of Fortunatus so called, which are found in Bruno,

are conspicuous by their absence from our document,
viz. in the note on the first verse, 'Dicitur igitur fides

credulitas sive credentia. Catholica universalis dicitur, id
est, recta, quam universa Ecclesia tenere debet. Ecclesia
vera congregatio Christianorum sive conventus populorum
'
dicitur' in the note on the thirteenth verse,
; Ergo si
omnia potest, quid est quod non potest ? Hoc non potest,
quod non convenit omnipotenti posse. Falli non potest, quia

veritas et sapientia est. Aegrotare aut infirmari non potest,
quia sanitas est. Mori non potest, quia immortalis est.
Finiri non potest, quia infinitus et perennis est' and in ;
the note on the seventeenth verse,

'
Quia si me interro-
gaveris quid est Pater, ego respondeo Deus et Dominus ;
similiter si interrogaveris, quid est Filius, ego dico Deus

et Dominus et si dicis quid est Spiritus Sanctus, ego
;
respondeo Deus et Dominus et tamen in his tribus per-;
sonis non tres Deos nee tres Dominos, sed in tribus, sicut
iam supra dictum est,unum Deum et Dominum confiteor.'
Instead of the last we have, De Patre si quis te interro-
'
gaverit, responde Deus et Dominus si autem de Filio, ;
similiter Deus et Dominus si vero de Spiritu Sancto,

;
indubitanter responde plenum Deum et Dominum esse.'
Another important difference between the two documents is
the presence in the one under our consideration of a remark-

able note defining the meanings severally of substantia,
stibsistentia, and essentia : this is wanting in Bruno. There

are many other variations, some significant, such as could
scarcely be considered mere clerical errors.
But notwithstanding these diversities the substantial
agreement observable throughout the greater part of the

two Commentaries leaves no room to doubt that one must
have been drawn from the other. Was this Commentary
the source from which Bruno derived his materials, the
basis on which he built? Or was the reverse the case?
The British Museum MS. Addit. 18043, which was neces-

sarily unknown to Waterland, being a recent acquisition of
our National Library imported from France, and was un-
noticed in connexion with the present subject until I drew
1
attention to it a few years ago
gives an answer of no,
uncertain kind to this question. It is a MS. of the tenth
century. This is the date assigned to it by the Catalogue ;
and, as there every reason to believe, correctly assigned.

is
Sir E. M. Thompson the present Librarian, formerly the

Keeper of the MSS., than whom we have no better judge
of the date of handwriting in ancient documents, expressed
to me a confident opinion to that effect. The MS. being
written in the tenth century, it is obvious that the Com-
mentary which it contains must have existed prior, and
indeed long prior, to Bruno's Psalter which was a work of s
the eleventh century, compiled between the years 1034 and

1045. And the work existing before his time, it is a mere
truism to assert that he could not have been the author
of it. He simply introduced it in substance into his Psalter,
inserting the three passages above cited from the Fortu-

natus Commentary, omitting the note of definitions which
I referred to, and
making several alterations of the text.
What he did in this instance is in exact accordance with
the system which he followed in the construction of the
other Commentaries contained in his Psalter. He was not
an original writer, but a compiler and manipulator of earlier
materials. His Commentaries on the Psalms and the
Canticles are compilations of notes gathered from the
Fathers ;
and those on the Lord's Prayer and Apostles'
Creed, in the form of question and answer, are borrowed
word for word from the eleventh and twelfth chapters of
a work entitled Disputatio P^lerorum^ which is placed
1
Early History of the Athanasian Creed, p. 67.
2o8 Documentary Evidence. [CH.
by Frobenius among the doubtful works of Alcuin. Its

genuineness is very uncertain but, whoever was the author ;
of the work, it must have been composed long before the

time of Bishop Bruno, being found in a MS. of the ninth
l
century .
Another reason for believing that our Commentary was

composed considerably before the time of Bruno is, that it
was evidently the source, as we shall soon see, from which
another Commentary, not compiled later than the tenth
century, was partly drawn.

What was the date of the composition of our document,
and who was its author ? Have we any clue to guide us
to any positive conclusions on these points ? The mere fact
of being found in a MS. of the tenth century proves

its
that to be the latest period at which it could possibly have

been written. The other fact I have mentioned, viz.
that it is in part the source of another Commentary which
cannot be placed later than that period, clearly forces us to
the conclusion that it was itself the work of the ninth
century at the latest, probably of the early part of that

century. And it bears some internal evidence confirmatory
of the conclusion thus arrived at. In its note on the
twenty-sixth verse of the Creed it makes use of the follow-

'
ing language : Necesse est ut incarnationem Domini
nostri lesu Christ! fideliter credamus. Quomodo fideliter ?
Non adoptivum sed proprium Dei filium, sicut dixit Apos-
tolus :
Proprio Filio suo non pepercit Deus, sed pro nobis
omnibus tradidit ilium.' This is strictly the terminology
prevalent during the Adoptionist controversy which raged
with the greatest intensity at the close of the eighth
century, but did not entirely cease till about Sao A.D.
Thus Paulinus, Bishop of Aquileia, who was one of the
1
Migne, Patrologia Latina, torn. ci. pp. 1097, 1098, 1136, and 1143.
leading opponents of the Adoptionist heresy, in his first
book against Felix of Urgel, says Pater non peper- :

'
. . .
cit, sed pro nobis omnibus tradidit ilium quern Apostolus ;
proprium non adoptivum filium confitetur.' Then he goes

on to quote, as the Commentary does, the passage from the
Epistle to the Romans. And he uses similar language in
the second book of the same work 1 The occurrence in the .
Commentary of a terminology thus distinctively character-

istic of the Adoptionist controversy points clearly to the
belief that emerged some time during the prevalence of

it
that controversy. And this seems to be confirmed by the

very emphatic manner in which it insists upon the Divinity
of the Holy Ghost in one of the passages, which dis-
criminate it from Bruno's Commentary :
'
De Patre si quis
te interrogaverit quid est in persona, responde Deus et
Dominus ;
si autem de Filio, similiter Deus et Dominus :
si vero de Spiritu Sancto, indubitanter responde plenum

Deum et Dominum eum esse.' Alcuin, in his work de Fide
Trimtatis**, written at the commencement of the ninth
century and dedicated to Charlemagne, employs the very

'
same epithet in reference to the Holy Spirit Spiritus :
Sanctus, sicut Pater et Filius, plenus est Deus et perfectus.'

And he goes on to dwell with some stress upon the pleni-
tudo of the unity of the Spirit with the Father and the
Son, being obviously induced thus to emphasize the point,

on account of its connexion with the doctrine of the Pro-
cession of the third Person which was, simultaneously with

the heresy of Adoptionism, a prominent subject of discussion
at the time. There are several other notable similarities,
indeed coincidences, of expression between this treatise and
1
S. Paulini contra Felicem Urgellitartutn lib. i.
cap. 53 ;
also lib. ii.
cap.
12. Migne, Patrologia Latina, torn. xcix. pp. 410, 432.
2
Lib. ii.
cap. xix. Migne, Patrologia Latina, torn. ci. p. 35.
P
2io Documentary Evidence. [CH.
our Commentary, which I abstain from stating at length,

and which tend to show that the two documents, if not the
productions of the same author, were at any rate the pro-
ductions of the same epoch. This verbal resemblance
would dispose us to think that both proceeded from the
same hand, had Alcuin ever been credited with the com-
position of a Commentary on the Athanasian Creed. But
he has not, so far as I am aware. On the other hand, there
is ancient authority for ascribing such a work to another
leading theologian of the same age, a contemporary of

Alcuin, who survived him nearly twenty years, and must
have been well acquainted with his treatise upon the Faith
of the Trinity, and probably heard it read at the Council
of Aix, held in the year 802, which he attended as one of
the bishops of Charlemagne's dominions, and may have
borrowed from it the terms and phrases which the Com-
mentary shares with it in common, who moreover took
an active part in the controversies of the epoch, and, what
is especially to our purpose, issued a Capitulare
requiring
the presbyters of his diocese to learn by heart, and acquire
an intelligent knowledge of, the Athanasian as well as the
Apostles' Creed
1
. This is Theodulf, Abbot of Fleury and
Bishop of Orleans, who in a Catalogue of Abbots of Fleury,

described by Baluze as being ex veteri codice MS. biblio-
thecae Colbertinae, is stated to have produced an Exposition
2
of the Creed of Athanasius . Our Commentary has never
1
See Migne, Patrologia Latina, torn. cv. p. 209 Vo, O sacerdotes :
'
Domini, admonemus, ut Ficlem Catholicam et memoriter teneatis et corde

hoc est, Credo, et Qiiicunque vult salvus esse ante omnia opus
intelligatis, est
1
ut teneat Catholicam Fidem.'

2
Quartus decimus Abbas Theodulfus annos xix et climidium, qui a glorio-
'
sissimo Iinperatore Karolo ex Hesperia propter eruditionis scientiam qua

pollebat in Gallias inductus Floriacensibus Abbas et Aurelianensibus datus est
Pontifex. Hie itaque, cum, ut diximns, ernditione praecipuus doctrinaque
habcretur, explanationem edidit Symboli Athanasii.' Catalogus Abbatum
yet been identified with this work, indeed, as I have

already said, has been hitherto confounded with the Com-
mentary of Bruno, but considering that it certainly was
in existence some time before, and may very probably
be assigned to the early part of the ninth century, I venture

to think that it may also with great probability be re-
garded as none other than the exposition drawn up by

Theodulf.
The few MSS. of this Commentary which I have men-
tioned as having fallen under my own notice must not be
supposed to form an exhaustive list. Doubtless there are

many more It appears to have been of all the
extant.
Expositions of the Athanasian Creed the most widely

circulated and the most generally used in the Middle
Ages, and it became the basis of other Commentaries. As

I shall have several occasions for referring to it, I propose
to describe it for convenience sake as the Stavelot Com-
mentary, from the former home of the earliest known MS.
in which it is preserved.
7. Since I wrote the above my attention has been drawn

to aCommentary which has been edited for the first time
from MS. No. 94 in the Library of Orleans by Monsieur
Cuissard, the Sub-Librarian of that city. Together with an
Exposition of the Canon of the Mass from the same MS.,
it subjoined to a notice by the editor of the Life and
is
writings of Theodulf, and a photograph facsimile of the

first page of the codex containing the Commentary is
prefixed to the volume as a frontispiece

1
The Rev. .
A. E. Burn, to whom I am indebted for my acquaintance
Floriace.nsium, printed in Baluzzii Miscellaneorum liber primus, p. 491.

Paris, 1678. Theodulf is the last of the abbots in the list.
1
Thfodiilfe, jfrveque d? Orleans, sa -vie et ses ceuvrcs, par Ch. Cuissard, Sous-
Bibliothecaire de la ville d'Orleans. Orleans, 1892.
with this Exposition, has also kindly informed me that

Monsieur Cuissard has the authority of Mons. Delisle, the
Director of the National Library at Paris, for assigning the
MS. to the ninth century, and that Mr. Scott of the British
Museum, judging from the facsimile in Mons. Cuissard's

book, places the date in the tenth century. The title of the
document is Explanatio fidei catholicae,' but there is no
'
mention of the name of the author or compiler. M. Cuissard

has no hesitation in identifying this with the Commentary
of Theodulf mentioned in the ancient Catalogue of Abbots
of Fleury before referred to, which was edited by Baluze ;
and so doing he follows the authors of the Histoire

in
littiraire de la France *. Apparently he considers the fact

of its being found is a MS. which belonged originally to
the Abbey of Fleury-on-the- Loire, of which Theodulf was
2
Abbot, a sufficient proof that it was his work But this .
clearly cannot be quite within the

maintained, as
it is
bounds of possibility that a Commentary by some other

author of the ninth century should have found its way at
some time to the library at Fleury. The external evidence
for Theodulfs authorship being thus slender, it is natural
to turn to the document itself and inquire what sup-
port it derives from thence. The Commentary is very
brief, ten verses of the Creed having no gloss or note

at all, and many of the notes not extending beyond
a few words. This, however; proves nothing. What is
1
Seeu. s., pp. 73, 74.
3
Atthe capture and plunder of Orleans by the Huguenots in 1562 most of
the Fleury MSS. fell into the possession of one Daniel, a lawyer of the place ;
and these treasures eventually reached the Vatican by different routes, some
as part of Queen Christina's collection, others as part of the collection of
the Prince Palatine. An account of the vicissitudes through which they
passed may be seen in Mabillon, de Liturgia Gallicana, Praefatio, xii. Some
however appear to have been left at Orleans, among them the one which
interests us.
iv.] Commentaries or Expositions, 213
more to the point, it is a rude and unpolished

is that
composition, apparently not the work of a learned and

cultured man, such as Theodulf was by reputation, and
as for the age in which he lived he would seem to have
been from the few works of his at present extant. The
terminology also is somewhat different from that used by
Theodulf. The Commentary has '
Filius percepit accepit
apprehendit humanitatem.' In the same connexion in the
seventh chapter of his treatise de Ordine Baptismi, which is
in an exposition of the Apostles' Creed, Theodulf
fact
employs the more usual words sttscipere and assumere.

The Commentary has '
Catholica Graecus sermo est in
nostra locutione universal is,' and again Christus in nostra
'
locutione unctus.' Theodulf in a similar connexion has

Latine. What is more notable still, in reference to the
Sonship of our Lord the Commentary describes Him as

proprins Filius simply. In a work by Theodulf, consider-
ing the active part which he took in the Adoptionist
controversy, we should have expected to find the more
distinctive phraseology which the heresy prevalent in his
time elicited and by which it was repudiated, such as Filitis
proprius, non adoptivus, or the like. And so in fact in his

Exposition of the Creed just quoted he speaks of our Lord
as verum Dei Filium, non factum aut adoptivum! Con-
'
sidering all this, I cannot help thinking it very doubtful

whether this document was the genuine work of Theodulf ;
it seems to me that the Stavelot Commentary may

be with greater probability ascribed to him, especially as
the latter contains the critical terminology condemnatory
of Adoptionism, which in the former is
conspicuous by its
absence.
But whoever was the compiler of this Commentary,
whether it was Theodulf or not, its discovery is of impor-
tance and interest in relation to the history of the

Athanasian Creed, because it is evidently drawn from
not fewer than four of the earlier Commentaries, which
we have already noticed, viz. the Fortunatus so-called,
the Troyes, the Paris, and the Stavelot. This connexion is
proved by the verbal coincidence and resemblance which

it bears to all of them, and which is traceable in several
instances. And this fact necessarily confirms our belief
in the antiquity of these four Expositions. For our
document must have been compiled in the ninth century
at the latest, considering the date of the MS., which, as

I have already said, M. Delisle, no mean authority, has
examined and assigned to that century. Besides, it is clear
from some palpable and gross errors, which this Orleans
copy contains, such as are obviously attributable to the
carelessness or ignorance of a copyist, that it was not
the autograph of the author or compiler so that a certain :
period must have elapsed, though possibly a very brief one,

between the composition of the Commentary and the
writing of this copy of it. Possibly too it may not have
been transcribed from the autograph and the errors may ;
be due to more than one copyist.

The Oratorian Commentary was, I believe, also a source
from which this Commentary was drawn, but not so
obviously as the four Commentaries above mentioned, the

connexion being traceable in two instances only, though
distinctly traceable, whereas in the other four it appears
more frequently. The same two passages of the Oratorian
Commentary which are thus connected with our docu-
ment are found also in the Bouhier, being no doubt
The compiler of
transferred to the latter from the former.
our Commentary may have drawn them from either, but
probably he drew from the former. In either case he must
have been acquainted with five out of the six Commentaries

already noticed, and gathered his materials from them.
In order to show the nature and construction of the
Commentary, and how the text has been corrupted by the
errors of the copyist or copyists, I subjoin three of the
notes, together with their respective sources.
'
(a) Note upon neque substantiam Troyes Commentary.
separantes,' ver. 4. 'Arrius . . . Filium Dei minorem
'
Arius . . . credebat Patrem maiorem esse dixit Patri Spiritum autem
. . .
quam Filium et Filium minorem quam Sanctum . . .

plusquam minorem quam
Patrem et Spiritum Sanctum minis- Filium et Patris et Filii ministrum
simum (sic). Dicebat Patrem quasi asserunt (V) .. .quasi quosdamgrad us
aurum, Filium quasi argentum, Spiri- impietatis suae in Deum, qui unus est,
turn Sanctum quasi aeramentum.' arbitratus ; Patrem scilicet ut aurum,
Filium vero quasi argentum, Spiritum
autem Sanctum eramentum (sic).'
The former of these two passages is clearly drawn with

some abbreviation from the latter. The barbarism minis-
simum one of the copyist's
is errors, to which I referred as
occurring in the Orleans MS. It must have been based on

the word ministrum of the Troyes Exposition. It could
not have been from the hand of the compiler. Patri in
the Troyes extract can scarcely be regarded as a wrong
reading, e and / being so frequently interchanged but ;
asserunt I should conjecture to be a copyist's error for
assentit. The illustration of the Arian hypothesis respect-

ing the Trinity from the three substances of gold, silver
and brass, seems to have been derived by the Troyes
commentator directly from St. Augustine. See note on
the passage in Appendix F.
(/;) Note on '

Descendit ad inferos,' The Commentary attribtited to
ver. 36. Venantius Fortttnatus.
'
Propter hoc ibidem descendit, ut
'
Ut protoplastum Adam et patri-
patriarchas et prophetas qui ibidem arenas et prophetas et omnes iustos,
iniustedetinebanturpropter ilia orient- qui pro originali peccato ibidem de-
alia (sic) delicta, ut eos liberavet a tinebantur, liberaret. . . .
Reliqui, qui
potestate diaboli. Memor sit illius supra originale peccato principalia

verbi prophetae :
mors, era mors crimina commiserunt, ut adserit Scrip-
tad!, morsus tuus ero, inferne. Partem tura, in poenali Tartaro remansemnt :
abstulit, partem reliquit, et postquam sicut in persona Christi dictum est per
pugnavit cum diabolo et pergit illud prophetam Ero mors tua, O mors,
:
bellum et exspoliavit infemum.' id est, morte sua Christns humani
generis inimicam mortem interfecit et

vitam dedit. Ero morsus tttus, in-
ferne. Partem morsit infernum pro
parte eorum, qnos liberavit :
partem
reliquit pro parte eornm qui pro
principalibus criminibus in tormentis
remanserunt.'
Here it may be observed that the note has been formed
mainly by the same process of selection and abbreviation

as in the former case. The words propter ilia orientalia
delicta are very remarkable : orientalia being evidently
a copyist's erratum for originalia. The compiler probably
substituted propter originalia delicta or peccata for pro
originali peccato, which appears in the Fortunatus extract.

It cannot be supposed that he wrote orientalia. The
quotation from Hosea xiii. 14 is evidently taken imme-
diately from that passage, and so also are the words
which follow Partem abst^llit, partem reliqztit morsit
being changed into abstiilit by the compiler, as con-
trasting more strongly with reliquit. These words, which

are obscure as they stand in the note, are explained by
reference to Fortunatus. And so much of .the note as
finds no correspondence in the Fortunatus extract may be
traced with more or less distinctness to other sources. The
word inittste, it may be noticed, has been inserted before
detinebantur. Considering that the compiler certainly had
before him the Troyes Commentary, I cannot help feeling
a strong suspicion that this was suggested to his mind by
the statement which it contains that the Son of God took
upon Him the nature of man for this end,

'
ut diabolum
. . . vlnceret et prostraret, . . .
quatinus et diabolus per iusti-
tiam victus cederet, et, quos iniuste retinebat, amitteret.' The
reference appears to be to our Lord's descent into hell, as well
as His death and burial. And if this was the case, the same
passage probably also suggested the allusion towards the
close of the note -pugnamt cum diabolo
possibly et pergit
written originally peregit ilhid bellum. The final words

are clearly either from the Oratorian Commentary or the
Bouhier, probably from the former, which borrowed the ex-

pression directly from the translation by Dionysius Exiguus
of the Synodical Epistle of St. Cyril of Alexandria.
(c] Note on the last verse. Troyes Commentary,

'
'ffaec estfides catholica quam univer- Haec est fides catholica, quam uni-
salis ecclesia cum electis suis corde versalis ecclesia in electis suis corde
credit, ore profitetur, et bonis actibus credit, ore profitetur, et bonis operibus
exsequitur. De qua 'fide, quicunque exequitur. De qua fide qtiicunque ex

et ii, qui christiano nomine censentur, his, qui christiano nomine censentur,
qnicquam detraxerit aut credere nolu- quicquam detraxerit aut credere nolu-
erit,procul dubio christianus non erit, erit, proculdubio catholicus non erit,
sed, intra ecclesiam positus sub nomine sed intra ecclesiam positus sub nomine
christianitatis recte catholicus, ut christianitatis recte catholicus, tit
haereticus reputabitur.' hereticns deputabitur.'
note was drawn entirely from the

It is plain that this
corresponding passage in the Troyes Commentary. The

second sentence has been rendered unintelligible by the sub-
stitution of ,et ii for ex his a mistake which a copyist
would be very likely to make and also from the change
of catholicus after proculdiibio into christianus. Whoever
made this change whether the compiler or a copyist
he seems to have been led into making it by the words
recte catholictts occurring after christianitatis. They are
evidently pleonastic, and formed no part

in all probability
of the original text of the Troyes Commentary. Such an

insertion might have been easily made, the manuscript copy
2i8 Documentary Evidence. [CH.
of it at Troyes the only one I believe known of being

certainly a transcript from an earlier codex.
8. For my knowledge of the next Commentary calling
for being probably the next in date, I am
notice, as
indebted principally to a MS. of the Canonici collection
in the Bodleian Library, written, as Mr. Macray and
Mr. Madan assure me, in Italy in the thirteenth century
Canonici, Bibl. 30. The volume contains a Psalter with

a gloss or comment annexed, written in three columns, the
text in the centre, the notes or comment in the marginal
columns, and occasionally inserted between the lines of

the text. The Psalms are followed by the Old Testament
Canticles and the Athanasian Creed, all having likewise
a gloss or comment attached, and written in the same
manner as the preceding part of the book. The apocryphal
i5ist Psalm is omitted. The Qidcunqite is followed by the
Benedicite and some hymns but these have no notes and
;
are in a different hand. The Athanasian Creed is entitled

'Fides catholica Athanasii episcopi.' The Commentary
upon it or notes is entirely drawn from the Stavelot and
Oratorian Commentaries. There is not a single note,
I believe, which may not be traced to one or other of
these sources. Sometimes, but rarely, a note is partly
from the one and partly from the other and sometimes ;
the original is condensed or abbreviated. The initial words

are:
'
Hec ratio fidei catholice traditur etiam in veteribus
codicibus a beato Athanasio Alexandrino conscripta, et
puto quod idcirco tarn piano et brevi sermone,' &c. This

must be discriminated from the commencement of the
Bouhier Commentary, which bears an obvious resemblance
'
to it Traditur quod a beatissimo Athanasio Alexandrine
:
ecclesie antistite istud fidei opusculum sit editum,' &c. The

resemblance is owing to the initial notes in both cases
being drawn from the latter part of the preface to the

Oratorian Commentary.
Another copy of this Commentary is to be found in the
Bodleian MS. Laud, Misc. 40. The book belonged originally
to the Benedictine monastery or cathedral at Rochester,
as we by a memorandum on f. i, verso
learn Liber de :
'
daustro Roffensi per Leonardum monachum.' It contains

a large miscellaneous collection of documents, and is ap-
parently divisible into three parts, written by different

hands and at different periods. The Athanasian Creed
with its comment but without any title, arranged as in the
previous case in three columns, occurs in the second part,
which, as Mr. Macray tells me, may be assigned to the
latter portion of the twelfth century. It commences on
f.
107, preceded by hymns and followed by the
a variety of
Apostles' Creed and Lord's Prayer, both of which have

a comment annexed.
A third deposited in the British Museum
copy is
Addit. MSS. 10924. The book is a Psalter 'cum glosa

ordinaria et interlineari,' written like Canonici 30 in three
columns, the text occupying the centre column, and is

dated by the Catalogue about the year A. D. 1 200 written
therefore in the twelfth or thirteenth century. It belonged
originally to St. Peter's, Erfurt, as we learn from a rubric at
(
the commencement, Psalterium glosatum sancti Petri in
'
Erfordia a proof of the wide circulation of this composite
Commentary, the first copy that we noticed being Italian,

the second English, and now we find a third, which was
used in central Germany. Here, as in the Canonici MS.,
the Athanasian Creed with its comment immediately follows
the Old Testament Canticles, the New Testament Canticles
' '
being omitted and it is headed by the title Athanasius

;
simply, of which I do not recollect to have met with another

instance. The volume closes with the Quictmque. It is

a handsome and decorated codex, but the Commentary
contains several omissions and inaccuracies, the results
evidently of carelessness on the part of the copyist.

A
fourth copy is in a Psalm cum glossa,' i. e. with'
notes or comment, which formerly belonged to the Cathe-

dral at Metz,and is now deposited in the Public Library
of that city, numbered 14, and ascribed to the tenth
century in the printed Catalogue

1
The Athanasian Creed,
.
entitled Fides Catholica,' occurs with its comment among

'
the Canticles, and is followed by the Nunc Dimittis,

Apostles' Creed, Te Deum, and Gloria in excelsis.
A
fifth is in a Psalter at Brussels of the twelfth century,
numbered 9191 in the Catalogue. I have not seen this nor

the Metz Psalter myself, but I have been informed by
a friend who has
inspected them, the Rev. Dr. Gibson,
Vicar of Leeds, that in both the gloss on the Qiiicunque
commences with the initial words of the Commentary
at present under our notice a sufficient evidence of its
identity.
In Swainson's work, The Nicene and Apostles Creeds^
there is mention 2 of a Psalter in the Library at Turin
No. 66 of the thirteenth century containing '
Declaratio
'
Fidei Catholicae with a gloss. In this case too the Com-

mentary is identified by the initial words.
For the same reason I have no doubt that the three

copies of a Commentary which are referred to by Waterland
on the authority of Tentzelius 3 as severally preserved in
the libraries at Gotha, Basle, and Leipsic, were also copies
1
Catalogue des mamiscrits des Bibliothtqties Pitbliques, vol. v. p. 7.
2
459-
3
Waterland, Critical History of the Athanasian Creed, chap. iii.
p. 54.
Oxford edition, 1870.
of this Exposition. The Leipsic MS. was described by

Tentzel's informant, Joachim Fellen, as belonging to the
twelfth century, not later, and written in three columns,
like the Bodleian MSS. just mentioned. The title applied
'
by it to the Quicunque was Fides Anastasii papae.'

The fact of this Commentary being found in a MS.
of the tenth century obviously sufficient proof that it
is
was extant at that epoch and could not have been com-
piled later.
9. In the Ambrosian Library at Milan my attention
was drawn by Dr. .Ceriani, the Librarian, with his usual
kindness, to a MS. having
the press-mark T. 103, which
he told me was written at Milan in the tenth century.
The first document in this book is an Exposition of the
'
Athanasian Creed, entitled Tractatus Catholicae Fidei,' in
the form of question and answer, which to my great regret
I had not time to examine thoroughly, nor to copy com-
pletely. I was able, however, to copy the following
passages. First, part of the preface, which is remarkable :
'INT. Quid est fides? R. Fides est credulitas illarnm rerum, quae non
videntur, ut illud Apostoli : Fides est sperandartim et cet. INT. Quae sunt
illae res, quae non videntur ? R. Non videtur Pater, non videtur Filius, non
tamen creduntur.
videtur Spiritus Sanctus, INT. Quis composuit hanc
. . .
fidem? R. Beatus Athanasius Alexandriae urbis episcopus. INT. Ubi com-

posuit? R. In Niceno concilio urbis Bithiniae. INT. Quando composuit?
R. Composuit quando conflictum habuit cum Arrio.'
Also,
dicitur a dilectione, quia diligit omnia qne creavit et ipse diligitur
'
Deus
a sanctis suis : dicitur a timore, quia timetur ab omnibus, adoratur a cunctis.
Adoratur quidem a bonis angelis, timetur a malis. Et Deus dicitur a divinitate,
quia divinus est et omnia cognoscit, antequam fiunt. Ergo Deus Pater dicitur,
quia diligit omnia quae creavit, et quia timetur ab omnibus, adoratur a cunctis,
et quia cognoscit omnia antequam fiant.'
Also on the verse commencing Unus autem,' where by

'
the way we find the readings carnem and deum :
'
Quia non est conversa divinitas in carne, sed humanitas assumpta est in
divinitatem. Ista, id est, humanitas est augmentata ; illud, id est, divinitas

non est minorata. Ista cepit esse quod non erat; ilia non desiit esse quod
erat.'
Also on the word '
passus ':
INT. Et (sic} cum Filio ?

<
fuit semper Patre R. Semper. INT. Et, si
semper fuit Pater cum Filio, ergo, quando passus est Filius, passus est Pater ?
R. Non. INT. Quare non? R. Quia divinitas impassibilis est. INT. Et
deseruit aliquando divinitas humanitatem ? R. Non semper enim fuit divinitas :
cum humanitate, et earn non deseruit etiam nee in ipsa cruce. INT. Ergo
patiebatur divinitas ? R. Non humanitas paliebatur, divinitas non
: sicut ;
diximus, impassibilis erat. Verbi gratia, elevat homo manum ut percutiat

arborem aut lignum cum securi. Verberatus radius solis, sed non patitur.
Sic et divinitas impassibilis erat.'
This illustration appears also in Alcuin, de fide Trinitatis,

lib. iii.
cap. xvi.
And on '
Descendit ad inferna ':
'
INT. Quomodo descendit ad inferna ? R. In anima sola. INT. Et quare
descendit ? R. Ut eos qui detinebantur ab inferno eriperet.'
The document
ends abruptly with the words ab inferno '
eriperet,' which are at the bottom of a page, so that it is
imperfect. On the next page is an Exposition of the

Lord's Prayer, but the commencement is wanting. Clearly
the leaf which originally contained the end of the Expo-
sition of the Athanasian Creed and the commencement
of that of the Lord's Prayer is missing. The Exposition of
the Lord's Prayer is followed by Traditio simboli,' an .'
exposition no doubt of the Apostles' Creed on occasion

of that ceremony and that by an Expositio misse cano-
;
'
nice.' The book also contains, according to the list of

contents written on the flyleaf,
'
Manuale Ambrosianum
sive Antiphonas.' This it is interesting to notice as con-
necting the book with Milan and the Ambrosian rite.
It is very observable that the preface states that the Creed
was composed by St. Athanasius at the Nicene Council,

which is an advance upon the tradition as it appears in the
preface to the Oratorian Commentary.
The Bodleian MS. Laud, Codd. Latini, 105, contains a

Commentary on the Athanasian Creed, which I believe
to be identical in substance at least with this Milan Com-
mentary. It is also in the form of question and answer,

and is introduced without any title immediately after a
similar interrogative Exposition of the Apostles' Creed.
A vacant space was left for the rubricated title ;
but it
was never up an omission occasionally noticeable

filled
in MSS. These two Commentaries follow immediately

after, and are written in the same hand, as a series of
Sermons books by Bishop Maurice. In addition
in three
to these documents, which are first in order, the volume
comprises several others which it is unnecessary to specify,

written in a variety of hands. The Catalogue assigns a
double date to it, the thirteenth century and the twelfth
indicating no doubt that part belongs to the one epoch
and part to the other. My belief in the substantial identity
of the Commentary on the Qtiicunque in the Milan MS.
with that in the Laud MS. based upon the amount of
is
coincidence which certainly exists between them. All the

passages which I copied from the former, and which
I have here reproduced with the exception of those from
the prologue, which strictly does not belong to the body
of the Exposition, are found also in the latter; and it is
most unlikely that the coincidence is limited to these
passages. Rather the presumption is unavoidable, that,

if the two documents were placed before us in their en-
tirety, we should find a similar coincidence pervading them
throughout, although possibly there might be variation in

some particulars. And this conviction will be strengthened
when we meet with a third codex, to be noticed by-and-
by, which contains all the passages cited from the Com-
mentary in the Milan MS. including the prologue, and the
whole of that in the Laud MS. We may safely conclude

that in the two MSS. we have but different copies of the
same Commentary a distinct from
Commentary any
hitherto noticed. There appears
be another copy of it
to
in the Vienna Imperial Library, judging from some extracts
1
printed by Dr. Swainson in his book on the Creeds ;
but have not been able to identify it in Denis' Catalogue

I
by the number which he assigns to it, 701. Either he

has made a mistake or has followed a different mode of
numbering.
One or two things remain to be said about the Laud
MS. It is a German MS., having belonged originally, in
common with several other MSS. of the Laud collection
in the Bodleian Library, to St. Mary's Church or Monas-
tery at Eberbach or Ebberbach in Baden. This is notified

by a memorandum on one of the blank leaves, '
Liber
sancte Marie Virginis in Ebberbach.' In Mr. Coxe's Cata-
logue the Sermons which precede the two Commentaries

'
on the Creeds are described as Mauricii de Soliaco epis-
'
copi Parisiensis Sermones ;

and if this is correct, the
portion of the MS. containing them could scarcely have

been written before the thirteenth century, Mauricius de
Soliaco having been Bishop of Paris from 1164 to 1196.
But the description does not appear to be borne out by
the MS., the rubric heading the first sermon being Sermo {
Mauricii episcopi in synodo,' and there is a similar rubric

to another sermon. Besides, according to Oudin 2 the
sermons of Mauricius de Soliaco are preserved in the
Bodleian MS., Digby, 149, and the sermons in that codex
'
are entitledSermones Mauricii episcopi Parisiensis/ &c., and
they appear to be different from those in our Laud MS.
1
Page 454, note.
2
Commentarius de scriptoribtis ecclesiasticis, torn. ii.
p. 1581. Lipsiae, 1722.
It would seem then that the latter must have been the
work of some other Bishop Maurice and the name was ;
not uncommon. The point, however, is of little or no

importance in reference to our subject, as it would not
follow from the mere fact of the Commentaries on the
Apostles' and Athanasian Creeds being subjoined to the

sermons that they were by one and the same author.
jo. A Commentary on the Athanasian Creed contained
in the MS. 20 of the Boulogne Library a glossed Psalter
executed at the conclusion of the tenth century or very
early in the eleventh here demands notice.
The compiler of this Exposition appears to have used
the Stavelot Commentary as the main element in its con-
struction. He evidently follows it
throughout, though
very freely, frequently adopting its language, but without
adhering to it invariably or accurately, omitting much
entirely, and introducing also other matter, most of which
is apparently original. And considering that
in this fact,
the manuscript is undoubtedly prior in date to Bruno, we
clearly see an additional proof that the Stavelot Com-

mentary existed before, and considerably before, his time ;
so that cannot be regarded as identical with his Com-

it
mentary, much less as founded upon it, the truth being
that he used it as the groundwork and main source of his

own Exposition.
And our document may be traced to other sources
besides that just mentioned. In two instances notes are
drawn from the so-called Fortunatus Commentary, one of
them being of some length the remarkable passage re-
lating to the Holy Trinity in which the doctrine is illus-
tratedby analogies observable in natural objects. Another
note seems drawn partly from this source, partly from
another Exposition. In one instance, if not more, the
Q
Troyes is borrowed from in the pas-

Commentary
sage illustrating the Arian doctrine of the Trinity by
comparison with the various metals of gold, silver, and

brass. It cannot be supposed that these were the only
cases where the compiler of our document made use of

earlier materials ; and no doubt others might be discovered
by any one more learned than myself.
Oneof the plates in the publications of the Palaeo-
graphical Society is taken from this MS. and the grounds

1
,
for assigning the date are stated by the editors as follows :
'
At
the beginning of the volume are some Latin acrostics,
from which it appears that the MS. was written for the
Abbey of St. Bertin in St. Omer by themonk Heriveus,
in the time of the Abbot Odbertus. The period of the
Abbacy of Odbertus is from A. D. 989 to 1008 ;
and in the
chartulary of the monastery under the year 1005, mention
is made of his having had
manuscripts written for him.'
It is obvious to remark that it does not follow from the
fact of Heriveus being the writer of the manuscript that
he was also the compiler of the Commentary on the Qui-
c^mq^ê which it contains.
For my knowledge of thisCommentary I am indebted
to the kindness of the friend whose name I have already
mentioned more than once in common with similar acts
of kindness the Rev. A. E. Burn, who lent me a copy
of it.
n. The true nature of Bruno's Commentary has been

already noticed. It is not an original work, but a recen-
sion of an earlier Commentary, edited by Bruno as part

of his glossed or annotated Psalter, some time between the
year 1
034 when he became Bishop of Wurzburg, and 1 045
the year of his death. The distinctive differences by which
1
Vol. iii.
plate 97.
it may be discriminated from the Stavelot Commentary,

1
on which it was based, were also specified The Psalter .
was dedicated by its compiler to Kilian, the Irish Apostle

and Patron Saint of Wiirzburg, who was martyred in 689,
in the following verses :
'
Sit collega tuae sortis, Pater O
Kiliane,
Antistes dono qui te veneratur in isto.'
The Bodleian Library Oxford possesses two early

at
copies of it, both of the eleventh century, and both well

written and richly decorated books in good condition
Rawlinson B. N. 163, and Laud Lat. 96. They are in
fact duplicate volumes. Not only are the original contents
of both the same, but
respects in
dimensions, other
character and style of handwriting and decoration, and
arrangement they present a most remarkable and close

resemblance, which conveys the impression that they are
works of the same epoch and scriptorium, and not im-
probably executed by the same scribe and the same artist.
Both are written in two columns, one containing the text,
the other written in a smaller hand the comment or
gloss, and the columns are of similar dimensions in the
two volumes, that in which the text is written comprising
invariably I believe twenty-three lines ; the ruling also of

the leaves corresponds in both. They must both have
been of the same size originally, but at present the Rawlin-
son MS. is a trifle the smaller of the two, owing evidently
to the leaves having been cut away by the modern binder,
whereas those of the Laud MS. are untouched. On the
verso side of each leaf in the Rawlinson MS. the word
Bruno iswritten in capitals at the top, and on the recto
eps ;
but this is wanting in the other volume. These two
1
Section 7 of this chapter.
codices must have been written within fifty years at the

utmost of Bruno's death, and may possibly have been
copied, at least as regards the Psalter and Canticles, from
his autograph, which was deposited at Wiirzburg; but
neither of them can be the autograph itself, inasmuch as
both comprise much matter which was not included in
by which it was
that book, and the dedication above cited,
headed, is absent from both.

These two books supply some internal evidence with
regard to the domiciles to which they originally belonged
and where they were used. From the petitions at the end
of the Litany, which follows the Canticles, it appears that
they were each used in a monastery. Thus we have :
'
Ut
istam congregationem in sancta religione conservare
digneris'; 'ut pontiff ces et abbates in tuo sancto servitio

'
confortare digneris and Oremus pro omni gradu ecclesie
;
'
pro pastore nostro pro rege nostro pro abbate nostro.'

And in the second of the prayers to be used after the
recitation of the Psalms intercession is made '
pro salute
regis et episcopi nostri et abbate nostro et pro universa
congregatione nostra sive pro omnibus qui locum istum
honoraverunt elemosinis.' There is some indication of the
where they were severally used.
locality of the monasteries
The prayers to be said after the recital of the Psalms are
followed by another series of prayers addressed to the three
Divine Persons, and several These, like the Litany

saints.
and the preceding prayers, are the same in both our MSS.,
with the exception of one remarkable variation which de-
serves to be noticed. After the prayer to the Apostles in
the Rawlinson MS. is one to St. Quirynus containing the
'
following words : Mente
corpore provolutus ante aram
et
in tuo honore,domine, consecratam et tibi, sancte Quiryne,

martyr Christi tuum in hac hora levamen orationum
. . .
imploro per eum qui solus est omnium delictorum re-

. . .
missor Ihesum Christum,' &c. In the Laud MS. this same
prayer occurs in the same position but instead of being ;
addressed to Quirynus it is addressed to Kilianus. This

variation is very striking and clearly points to the conclu-
sion that the- Rawlinson MS. must have been used in some
monastery where the special cultus of St. Quirynus was
observed, and it was observed at the Benedictine Abbey at
Tegernsee in Bavaria after the translation of his remains to
that place from Rome in the eighth century, whilst on the
other hand the Laud MS. was in all probability a manual
of devotion at Wurzburg where the memory of St. Chilian
was had peculiar veneration and his relics were de-

in
posited in the tomb over which the cathedral had been

built. This conclusion is confirmed by the fact that the
latter volume is one of forty-six Latin MSS. which were
'e Collegio Herbipolensi l in Germania sumpti A. D. 1631,
cum Suecorum regis exercitus per universam fere Ger-
maniam and which formed a portion of the
grassarentur,'
first of the munificent gifts with which Archbishop Laud
2
enriched the Bodleian Library .
Waterland enumerates ten MSS. of Bruno's Commentary,

as he supposes 3 Of these, No. 2, the Eadwine Psalter at
.
Trinity College, Cambridge; No. 4, Bodleian Laud 17;

No. John's College, Oxford 101 No. 7, Balliol College,
6, St. ;
Oxford 32 and No, 9, the St. Germain's MS., now Biblio-

;
4
theque Nationale Paris Lat. 12020, I have noticed above
as copies of the Stavelot Commentary. No. 8, the MS. in
the Cathedral Library at York, I have reason to believe is
1
The College of Wiirzburg.
2
Macray's Annals of the Bodleian Library, p. 61.
3
Critical History of the Athanasian Creed, pp. 49-51. Oxford, 1870.
*
Section 6 of this chapter.
also acopy of that Commentary, and I have been informed

by my friend the Rev. A. E. Burn that it is so. Waterland
wonders at the great variations between the York, the
Trinity College, and the St. Germain's MSS. the others
he had not seen himself and the printed copies of Bruno.
But clearly his perplexity was owing to his not perceiving
that these MSS. all contain copies of another, though
cognate, Commentary. The British Museum MS. Addit.

18043, which was necessarily unknown to him, would have
solved his difficulty. There remain four other MSS. men-
tioned by the same scholar, as copies of Bruno. With
respect to No. 10, now Harleian 2953, in the British

Museum, which he have been copied from Bruno
states to
by order of Peutenger, he was certainly misinformed. It

is a Psalter written at the beginning of the sixteenth century,
and contains the Athanasian Creed in its usual place at the
end of the Canticles, but without any gloss or comment.

It is interesting for the marginal notes which occur in it
of contemporary events, and particularly of the births and

deaths of members of the Peutenger family at Augsburg,
to whom it belonged. No. 5 Merton College, Oxford,
208 be noticed by-and-by
will : the Commentary is drawn
partly from the Stavelot Commentary, partly from the

Oratorian, and partly from another source. No. I the
autograph copy of Bruno in the year 1533 was preserved
in the library of the Church of Wiirzburg, as we learn from

the preface of Cochlaeus to his edition but according to ;
the latest editor of Bruno Denzinger, who was a Professor

of the University of Wiirzburg it was well-nigh destroyed,
or at any rate so much injured as to be no longer of any
use or value, during the Swedish war or in popular tumults
1
in the sixteenth century No. 3 is our Laud MS. Thus
.
1
Prolegomena to .S". Brunonis Opera. Migne, Patrol. Lai. torn, cxlii. p. 28.
of the ten MSS. mentioned by Waterland, two only are
really copies of Bruno, and of these one has long since

perished, or nearly so. The Rawlinson MS. was necessarily
unknown to him, having come to light since his time.
There have been several printed editions of Bruno's
Psalter, including of course the Athanasian Creed, with his
Commentary upon it. The first was printed by Jeorius

Reyser, probably in 1480 or about that time. A copy of
thisbook is preserved in the British Museum. It is in folio,
printed in two columns, the text in one, the gloss or com-

mentary in a much smaller type in the other the titles ;
and initial letters of Psalms and Canticles are rubricated.

It is without title or colophon or date. The date assigned
by the Catalogue, but doubtfully, is 1486 :
1480 is the date
assigned to the edition by Denzinger, and with more prob-

ability. On the flyleaf of the British Museum copy is the
following memorandum by a former owner ' This book is :
perfect, without title, beginning corrigendi and ending
poterit. It is the first printed edition typis ReyserL No

date.' It is added that the book was
in its original binding
when purchased by the signatory, and he had had it re-

bound. This is signed E. Stanfield, June aa, 1821 ?
'
An '
' '
editorial preface commencing Corrigendi emendandique
contains a notable passage with reference to Bishop Bruno :
'
Thesaurisans posteris filiis suis memorabilem et sanctum
psalmorum librum ex quo ille impressus est sumptuose
scriptum, quasi hereditatis spiritualis non minimam por-
tionem reliquit. Quod et apostolo nostro beatissimoque
civitatis Herbipolensis primo episcopo Chiliano offerens
eundem sanctum patronum nostrum versiculis exorat Sit
collega tuae sortis, pater O Kiliane, Antistes dono qiti te
veneratur in isto? This possesses special interest as in-
forming us that Reyser's edition was printed from Bruno's

original copy then preserved at Wtirzburg. The Athanasian

Creed inthis book is entitled ( Fides Catholica sancti
Athanasii episcopi.' The Commentary upon it I have

examined, and it appears to me to contain all the peculiar
passages and readings which distinguish Bruno's recension
from the Stavelot Commentary. The Bodleian Library
possesses three copies of this book, the press-marks being
Laud Lat. 33, Auct. M. infra 16, and Auct. M. infra 15.
The second was printed by Antony Koberger at
edition
Nuremberg Of this also there is a copy in the

in 1494.
British Museum, and another in the Bodleian. It seems to
be a reprint as regards the matter of Reyser's edition, in-
cluding his preface. It is arranged in three columns, the

text occupying the centre, the comment those on each
side.
The third was also issued by Koberger at Nuremberg in
1497. There is a copy of this in the Bodleian.

Two editions were produced by Johannes Cochlaeus, the
first in 1531 at Wiirzburg, the second in 1533 at Leipsic.
This was reproduced in the Bibliotheca Magna Patrum at
Cologne in 1618, torn, xi, and again in the Bibliotheca
Maxima Patrum at Lyons in 1677, torn, xviii.
The latest edition, I believe, is that of Henry Denzinger,

Professor of Theology in the University of Wiirzburg.
This is printed in Migne's Patrologia Latina, torn, cxlii,
and is therefore easily accessible.

12. In the Milan MS. M. 79, assigned to the eleventh
century, which have previously alluded to as containing

I
a copy of the so-called Fortunatus Commentary, there are,
immediately preceding it, two other Expositions of the

Athanasian Creed. I regret that during my visits to the
Ambrosian Library Iwas unable to examine these docu-
ments fully ;
but I copied a few passages from each. The
first follows immediately three Expositions of the Lord's
Prayer, commencing on f.
33, and is introduced by the
'
rubric, Expositio fidei catholice.' It is very short and
simple, and therefore probably of early origin. Some
opinion respecting it may be formed from the two following
passages, the commencement '
Qtdcunqtte homo vult salvus

esse ante omnia id est super omnia opus : est ut teneat id est
retineat vel intelligat : catholicam id est universalem
fidem :
id est credulitatem '; and the note on the words de propriis '
'
'
factis as follows : et erimus tune reddituri rationem de
propriis factis nostris quicquid egimus in hoc saeculo, non
solum de factis, sed etiam de pravis et immundis cogita-
tionibus, si non fuerimus ex per his per penitentiam et
opera bona exercenda abluti.' The second is much longer,

and is introduced without any title, it being considered
apparently that the title in the first case applied equally to
this Exposition. It is preceded, as is frequently the case,
with a prologue on Faith, commencing with the words,
'
Fides est illarum rerum, que non videntur, credulitas, ut
illud Apostoli ;
Est fides sperandarum' &c. This very
1
definition occurs, as we have before noticed ,
in the pro-
logue to an interrogative Commentary which is found in

another Milan MS. T. 103. The prologue ends with the
'
following account of the origin of the Quicunque Mani- :
festum est hanc fidem, que catholica dicitur, Spiritum

Sanctum per hos (sic] beati Athanasii Alexandrini episcopi
tempore Arrii heresiarchi edidisse, per quam non solum

ipsius Arrii sed etiam cunctorum hereticorum perversum
dogma destrui posset/ This may be compared with the
account in the Oratorian prologue, as well as that just
mentioned in Milan T. 103. The description of the Atha-
nasian Creed 'fides que catholica dicitur' is worthy of
1
See above, sect. 8.
notice. The exposition speaking begins 'Quicumque

strictly :
id est unusquisque : milt id est cupit salwts esse ante id

:
est super omnia :

opus est id est necesse est : tit teneat
id est manu This gloss or note on ut teneat is
mentis.'
remarkable, especially as it occurs also in an interrogative

Commentary in Laud Lat. 105
'
zit teneat non manu cor-
poris, sed mentis' a Commentary which I have already
1
noticed as substantially identical with that in Milan T. 103.
Further, the doctrine of the Trinity is illustrated in our
document by the analogous relations of 'sol, splendor et
'
calor an illustration which is also found in the inter-
rogative Commentary in those two MSS. and in a third to
which I shall soon draw attention. Lastly, I copied a long

passage referring to the categories, which for fear of pro-
lixity I forbear to transcribe at length : suffice it to say

that part of it appears to be based upon a passage in the
Oratorian Commentary, which is drawn word for word
from St. Augustine, while the rest has an evident relation
to the fifteenth chapter of the first book of Alcuin, de Trini-
tate. would seem that the second of these Exposi-
Thus it
tions must have been connected with the interrogative
Commentary Milan and Laud MSS., the Oratorian

in the
Commentary, and Alcuin's Treatise on the Trinity.
13. The British Museum MS. Reg. 8. B. xiv. comprises

with a variety of documents an interrogative Commentary
'
on the Athanasian Creed, entitled Interrogaciones et re-
sponsiones de Fide Catholica super Symbolum beati
Athanasii Alexandrinae urbis episcopi.' This document is
clearly drawn partly from the Stavelot Commentary cast

into the form of question and answer, and partly from the
interrogative Milan T. 103 and Laud

Commentary in
Lat. 105, including the prologue respecting faith and the

1
See above, sect. 8.
composition of the Creed, which appears in the former MS.

only. It contains, I believe, very little which may not be
traced to one or other of these sources. The correspon-

dence is literal and distinct. The British Museum volume
includes, as I have stated, several other documents written
in a variety of hands and at different times. Our document
isassigned by the catalogue to the twelfth century in the :
judgement also of Sir E. M. Thompson, kindly expressed

to me, it was written at that epoch and in England. It
commences on fol. 145, recto.

14. At thesame time when Dr. Ceriani drew my atten-
tion to Milan T. 103, he placed in my hand another MS.
containing a Commentary on the Athanasian Creed. It
belongs in his opinion to the twelfth century, and has

the press-mark I. 153. The Commentary commences on
133, and
'
fol. is entitled Expositio fidei catholice.' In
this case also I was only able to transcribe a few passages.
The first of these is from the prologue: 'Hanc fidem,
que catholica dicitur, edidit Athanasius Alexandrine urbis

ecclesie episcopus tempore diaconatus sui propter hereticos
et maxime propter Arrium.' This is evidently similar to
the preface of the second Commentary in Milan M. 79.
Two passages seem to be connected with the Exposition in
Milan T. 103 and Laud 105, and three appear to be based
upon the Fortunatus Commentary. The readings of ver. 33
are deserving of notice Unus autem non conversations
:
'
divinitatis in carne, sed assumptione humanitatis in deum.'

Conversations is notable, as it was originally written in the
ancient Bobio MS. now in the Ambrosian Library: it is
also the reading of the tenth- century Psalter at Salisbury.
The error therefore was one of early date. In all prob-
ability the mark of contraction over the e in carne
signifying the omission of the final m has been left out

inadvertently, as deum is certainly the reading, and the

Exposition immediately after adds Domini nostri Ihesu :
'
non est conversa in carnem

Christi divinitas Ipsa tamen . . .
divinitas carnem, id est, humanitatem adsumsit.'

Milan T. 103, before noticed,
This, like is peculiarly
a book of Milanese Church offices and ritual. Among the
contents, as stated in a list written in a modern hand

on the flyleaf, are
'
Ordo et cerimonie primitivae Medio-
3
lanensis ecclesiae per totum annum, De recuperatione '
Ambrosiani officii facta ab Eugenic/ 'Expositio matutini

officii facta a Theodore Archiepiscopo,' or, according to the
more full and correct description of the rubric heading the
document, 'Expositio matutini officii Sancte Ambrosiane
Mediolanensis hecclesie (sic] edita a sancto Feodoro archi-
episcopo eiusdem ecclesie.' followed by the Com- This is
mentary on the Athanasian Creed, then comes Expositio

'
misse Ambrosiane' and next Expositio Symboli.' The

;
'
list is headed '

Liber appellatus Beroldus in quo diversa
notabilia ecclesiae Mediolanensis continentur.'
It is clear that these two Milan MSS. are of special
value, as evidence of the close connexion of the Quicunque
with the ancient Milanese Church and the Ambrosian rite.
15. Among the works of the celebrated Abelard is
a Commentary on the Athanasian Creed, entitled in the

'
printed editions Petri Abaelardi expositio fidei in Sym-
bolum Athanasii.' 1
It is easily accessible in
Migne's series .
It is very short, and passes over in silence by far the greater
part of the Creed. It bears the impress of an independent
and thoughtful mind but some of the glosses and notes

;
are obviously drawn from pre-existing Commentaries. That

on neque confundentes coincides with the Exposition in
Laud 105. In the derivation of persona the Oratorian
1
Patrol, Lot. torn, clxxvii. pp. 629-632.
Commentary is followed : 'Persona .

.per se ^ma dicitur,
.
non rei alii in imam substantiam sociata.' Some of the

opinions expressed are worth noting. Those who shall be
found alive at Christ's coming shall undergo, it is declared,
a momentary death, and their restoration to life will be
their resurrection. Ignem aeternum is explained thus :
'
Summum atque indeficientem cruciatum. sive ille ignis cor-
poreus tantum sit atque materialis, sive quicunque interior
animae cruciatus.' As Abelard died A.D. 1142 at the age
of sixty-three, the Exposition must obviously be placed in
the early part of the twelfth century, probably between
A.D. mo and 1142.
16. The document which appears among the printed
editions of the works of Hildegardis Abbess of St. Rupert
near Bingen on the Rhine, with the title Explanatio Sym- '
boli Sancti Athanasii ad congregationem sororum suarum Y

is not strictly
speaking a Commentary or Exposition of the
Athanasian Creed, and I can scarcely suppose that the
above title was applied to it by the author. It is rather
a discourse of a very wide and comprehensive nature,
addressed by Hildegardis to her nuns, in course of which,
for the purpose of expounding the doctrines of the Trinity
and Incarnation, she employs the language of the Qni-

cunque. A
great part of the discourse, perhaps the greater
part, has no reference to the Creed whatever but, though it ;
cannot be classed as a Commentary, from which it differs

in purpose and construction, it may be adduced in proof
of the value attached to the Athanasian Creed at the time
as an exposition of the Faith. This document must have
been composed after the year 1148, when Hildegardis
became Abbess of Rupert; she died in 1179 or 1180.
St.
17. No. 1655 of the Phillipps or Middlehill collection

1
Migne, Patrol. Lat. torn, cxcvii. pp. 1065-1081.
a MS. of the thirteenth

century- -in addition to other
documents contains the Athanasian Creed entitled 'Fides
Catholica edita a sancto Athanasio,' with a Commentary.
The Commentary is short, and most of the notes are
evidently derived from the Fortunatus Commentary ;
amongst the notes are inserted some quotations from

St. Augustine, and one from Rufinus's Exposition of the
Creed, not, however, ascribed to Rufmus, but to Jerome.
This is the last document in the volume. The other
'
contents are, Tractatus sancti Augustini episcopi a primo
Psalmo usque infinem quinquagesimi,' a Commentary from
various sources on the rest of the Psalter, '
Proemium
magistri Petri super Psalterium,' the usual Old and New
Testament Canticles, the Lord's Prayer and Creed, all with
a gloss or comment.
This book was given, as we learn from a memorandum
at the end, to the Church of St. Vincent at Metz, by
Dame Soffia, surnamed Ducelatte, pro remedio anime sue,''
and of that of her husband and son. From another note

on the first page it appears at one time to have belonged
to the Jesuits at Paris.
18. The Merton
College MS., numbered 208 in Mr. Coxe's
Catalogue and assigned by him to the thirteenth century,
is a Psalter with gloss or comment, followed by the usual
Old Testament Canticles and the Athanasian Creed, all of

which have likewise a gloss or comment, but no titles.
It is a handsome folio volume. The Psalms with their

comment are written in two columns, the Canticles and
Creed with their comment in three, the text as usual
occupying the centre. The comment on the Psalms is

from Augustine and Cassiodorus, in places from Jerome
and Ambrose also. The notes, forming the Commentary
on the Athanasian Creed, are for the most part either from
the Stavelot Commentary or the Oratorian, in one case

from these two combined, but a few notes are from another
source.
It is worthy of notice, that while neither the Creed nor
its Commentary in this Psalter have any title, the former
is distinctly ascribed by the latter to Anastasius, not
Athanasius. The first note commences with the words :
'Hie beatus Anastasius liberum arbitrium posuit' The

must have been made designedly. The next
alteration
MS. we shall mention will indicate what Anastasius was
probably meant.
The Quicunque^ occurring as it does
position of the
immediately after the Old Testament Canticles, the New
Testament Canticles, together with the Benedicite, Te
Deum, Lord's Prayer and Apostles' Creed being omitted,
is also noticeable in this volume. It seems to be not
uncommon in glossed Psalters of the twelfth and thir-
teenth centuries, being found, as previously mentioned, in

the Bodleian MS. Canonici, Bibl. 30, which contains the
Commentary compiled from the Stavelot and Oratorian
Commentaries, and in Laud Lat. 17 and Balliol 32, in
both of which the Stavelot Commentary appears. This
MS. is number 5 in Waterland's list of manuscript copies
of Bruno's Commentary. Clearly he was misinformed
it.
respecting
There are some interesting memoranda in the Merton
book of former owners. On the flyleaf there occurs :
'Liber Will. Reed Episcopi Cicestriensis quern emit a

venerabili patre Thoma
Tryllek Episcopo RofTensi. Oretis
igitur pro utroque.' By another note it appears to have
been presented to the College by the former bishop 'ad
usum sociorum ibidem (i.e.
in libraria) studentium cathe-
nandus.' According to Bishop Stubbs' Registrum, Thomas
Tryllek was consecrated Bishop of Rochester at Avignon

in 1364, and died in 1372 and William Reed was conse-
;
crated at the same place Bishop of Chichester in 1368, and

died in 1385* Another person, Master Burbathe, Doctor in
Theology, and formerly Fellow of the College, is repre-

sented as the donor in a note written in a later and different
hand on the first leaf. The book would appear therefore to
have come into the possession of this second donor by some
means notwithstanding the chains in which it had been fast
bound in the library.
19. Simon Tornacensis, who was a canon of Tournayand
a distinguished teacher of theology in the early part of
the thirteenth century, composed a Commentary on the
Athanasian Creed which has never been printed, but is
extant in the Corpus Christi College, Oxford, MS. No. 250,
f. 24of the thirteenth century, and in the Paris Biblio-
v.,
theque Nationale MS. Latin 18068 of the same century,

f. 75 r., also in the Basle MS. B. ix. probably of the
6,
fourteenth century. The latter appears from a memo-

randum at the end to have belonged formerly to the
Friars Preachers or Dominicans at Basle. Other manu-
script copies of it at Paris, Bruges, and Villers in Brabant
1
are mentioned by Oudin . It is a long and elaborate
Exposition. The prologue commences :

'
Apud Aristo-
telem argumentum est ratio faciens fidem, apud Christum
argumentum est fides faciens rationem.' The comment
'
proper begins :
Qtiicunque, &c., de quacunque gente, qua-
cunque conditione, quocunque sexu, non enim Deus ob
praerogativam gentis vel conditionis vel sexus istum re-
spicit, vel ob vilitatem illorum ilium despicit, sed in omni

gente, conditione, sexu, qui timet Deum acceptus est illi.'
A very remarkable feature in this document is that it
1
De Scriptoribus Ecclesiasticis, torn. iii. pp. 26-33. Lipsiae, 1722.
distinctly and repeatedly ascribes the Creed to Pope Anasta-

sius, not Athanasius. Thus in the prologue Pope Anastasius
is stated to have gathered together, and that in a synod of
'
into a com-
'
prelates multitudine praesidum convocata

' '
pendious formula described as symbolum the articles of
the Christian religion and the heresies opposed to them.

And this Pope Anastasius would seem to have been the first
Pope of the name (whose pontificate lasted from 398 to 402),
as in his time the heresies of Arius, Sabellius, Pelagius,
Eutices, and Nestorius had sprung up and spread abroad.

And again and again in the course of the Exposition
Anastasius, never I think Athanasius, is referred to as the
author. For instance, we find
'
Una Anastasii intentio est
in hoc simbolo simplicitatem fidelium in articulis nostre

religionis instruere ad electionem.' The colophon is to the
same effect
'
Explicit feliciter expositio super symbolum

:
Beati Anastasii.' Neither in the Oxford MS. nor the Basle

has the Commentary any title at the beginning.
It may be interesting to mention that in commenting
on the Incarnation Simon clearly intimates his belief that
the Blessed Virgin was not exempt from the taint of
original sin.
20. The Commentary of Alexander Necham, sometimes
called 'Alexander de Sancto Albano' because he was
a native of St. Alban's, is a work of the same epoch it ;
must have been composed either at the close of the twelfth
century or the beginning of the thirteenth, as the author

died A. D. 1217. It has never been printed: but it is
preserved in a British Museum MS. of the thirteenth

century Harl. 3133, f. 92, and in two Bodleian MSS. of
the same century Bodl. 284 and Auct. D. 2. 9. The two
latter are both Psalters with a gloss or comment. In Bodl.
284 the Athanasian Creed with its gloss or Commentary
R
follows the Psalms immediately, as there are no Canticles ;
in the other Oxford MS. Old Testament it follows the
Canticles, which, like the Psalms and the Creed, are accom-
panied by a comment. In the first-named Oxford MS. the
Commentary on the Quicunque is without title or colophon,
'
in the other has the
Expositio fidei catholice
it title
a magistro Alexandro edita,' and in the British Museum

MS. it has nobut the following colophon ' Explicit
title, :
fides catholica Atanasii (sic) episcopi exposita a magistro
Alexandro de sancto Albano.' The British Museum MS.

I may add is not a Psalter : it contains homilies from the
Fathers upon the Gospels for Sundays and festivals, and
our document comes at the end of the volume, written in
a different hand from the preceding contents.
This also a long and elaborate Commentary, written
is
with all the dialectical subtlety and refinement charac-

teristic of the Schoolmen. The prologue commences,
'
Caput aquile visum ab Ezekiele eminentius erat ceteris

tribus capitibus,' and it ends, In commendacione ergo '
orthodoxe et catholice fidei hereses extirpare et eradicare
intendit Atanasius (sic) in hoc simbolo dicens.' Thus the

Creed is distinctly ascribed to Athanasius. The Exposition
proper begins,
'
Quicunqzie milt salmis esse, &*c. Hec est

enim victoria que vincit mundum fides nostra. Signanter
dicit milt et non dicit quicunque salvus quia parvulus erit,
baptizatus, si decedat, sic salvatur et non milt salmis esse!

It is a notable peculiarity of Necham's Commentary that to
a large extent it is a comment upon another comment,
which quoted not fewer than thirty times, I think, the
is
several quotations being examined, discussed, and explained.

In eleven cases the Commentary thus quoted and ex-
'
pounded is indicated by its title, viz. Notetur glosa scJw-

lastica que dicit,' &c. It was so called, I presume, from
being used as a manual of instruction in the schools. In

other cases the particular note or comment is simply de-
' ' ' '
scribed as glosa,' or glosa interlinearis or marginalis,'
according as it was written between the lines of the text

or in one of the marginal columns. The term glosa mar- '
' ' '
ginalis volatilis or glosa volatilis also occurs in one or

two cases, referring I
presume to an additional marginal
column besides the two ordinarily found on either side of
that containing the text this fourth column being some-
times resorted to for convenience when the notes were
'
numerous. This '
glosa scolastica was evidently a com-

pilation drawn from earlier Commentaries and the Fathers.
Thus of the thirty passages quoted fifteen are from the
Stavelot Commentary, one from the Bouhier, four from that
attributed to Fortunatus (but these probably were drawn
directly from the Exposition found in the Phillips MS.
1655, in which they all appear), four are from St. Augustine,
one apparently from Alcuin : the remaining five I am not
able to trace to their sources. Of the four passages drawn
from St. Augustine I should say that three are expressly
stated to be so the fourth is probably taken directly from
;
the Phillips Commentary. These evidences of a Com-

mentary on the Athanasian Creed, which must have been
current in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries and widely
used, have hitherto escaped the notice of modern scholars.

In the Oxford MS.
Bodl. 284, immediately after the
Commentary of Alexander Necham, another Exposition of

the Athanasian Creed commences. It is imperfect, ending
at the seventeenth verse, Quia sicut singillatim and this ;
is not owing to any mutilation of the book, which is com-
plete and in good condition evidently it was never;
finished. Like the Commentary which it follows it has

neither title nor colophon, and consequently its authorship
R 2
must be uncertain ;
but whoever composed it must have
had Necham's Commentary before him, which in the com-
mencement of the prologue it evidently follows ; in fact, the
initial words are the same in both. It also resembles
Necham's Commentary in ascribing the Qtiicunque to
Athanasius and in quoting the 'glosa scolastica,' which it
does four times. Three of these quotations clearly have
the Stavelot Commentary for their source, and in two of
the three the words introducing the quotation expressly
'
mention the ' glosa scolastica as the document quoted
'in glosa scolastica dicitur'; but in the words introducing
'
the third the document quoted from is described as glosa
Anselmi.' The Anselm thus clearly accredited with the
'
compilation of the glosa scolastica must have been the

'
Dean of Laon, who flourished about A.D. 1100 and died in

1117. Nothing can be more probable than that he should
' '
have compiled this glosa or Commentary on the Athana-
sian Creed, inasmuch as he was the author of a similar
work on the Old and New Testaments, and another of the
same nature on the Psalter has been attributed to him 1 .
The MS. Bodl. 284 appears to have been written at the
abbey of Cirencester, of which Necham was abbot from

1213 to 1217, for the word Cirencestrie has been written
in the same hand as the text of the book at the top of the
first page, and is quite legible, though an attempt has been
made to erase it and the same word written by the
;
original hand is found elsewhere in the book in a similar

position, particularly on f.
294. This circumstance, con-
sidered in connexion with the marked resemblance which
in some particulars the unfinished Commentary before-
1 '
Glossaturam super Psalterium et epistolas Pauli ab Anselmo per glossulas
interlineantes marginalesque distinctam,' quoted in Ducange's Glossary under
'
the word '
Glosa from Vita Anastasii IV, apud Murat. torn. iii. p. 440.
mentioned bears to that of Necham which it follows
points to the conclusion as probable that the former as well

as the latter was compiled by him, or at any rate if not
by him, by one of the canons of his house. Cirencester

Abbey was a house of regular Augustinian canons.
Oudin describes Alexander Necham as Philosophus
'
eximius, eruditionis profundae Theologus, Rhetor ac Poeta

suo tempore insignis/ and then proceeds with an account of
his life, which is extremely inaccurate. Having stated
that Necham taught publicly about the year in Paris
1 1 80, he adds that after his return to England he was
made '
Cicestriensis Canonicus ut constat ex MS. codice
Sancti Germani Parisiensis V And
subsequently he quotes
the words of the St. Germain's MS., which are his authority
for this assertion :
'
Liber magistri Alexandri Canonici
Cirecestrensis/ Clearly this represents him not as a canon
of Chichester, '
Canonicus Cicestrensis,' but as a canon
of Cirencestre. Probably in the MS. there was a mark of
contraction over the denoting the omission of the n
first e,
after it. Evidently Oudin did not know of such a place as

Cirencestre or Cirencester hence his mistake. Then he ;
' '
continues :
Unde,' i. from Chichester, Excestriam se
e.
conferens factus in eadem ecclesia Canonicus regularis divi

Augustini, anno tandem 1215 eiusdem ecclesiae Abbas con-
stitutus est.' In thus representing Necham as first an
Augustinian canon regular and afterwards abbot of Exeter,

2
Oudin appears to have been misled by Bale Cave also, .
strange to say, has fallen into the same mistake, for mistake
it obviously is, inasmuch as there never were canons regular
nor abbot nor abbey at Exeter. The canons there were

secular canons, and at the time were without a dean, the
1
Oudin, De Scriptoribus Ecclesiasticts, torn. iii.
pp. 4-8.
2
Scriptorum Britanniae centuria tertia. Basiliae, 1559, p. 274.
deanery not having been instituted until 1225- The truth

appears to be that Necham first became a canon regular
of the Augustinian abbey of Cirencester and was subse-
quently elected abbot. Tanner dates his appointment to

the abbacy in iai5; Dugdale in 1213. According to the
1
latter he died in 1217 .
21. The next Commentary calling for attention seems

hitherto to have escaped notice altogether. It was written
a
by contemporary of the last-mentioned commentator, as
would appear probable, and one bearing a very similar

name. A copy of it is preserved in the Bodleian thirteenth-
century MS., Rawlinson C. 67, a book which originally
belonged to Hereford Cathedral, and before it passed
into the Rawlinson collection must have been for a time
ownership of Hearne the antiquary, as appears by a
in the
memorandum on the flyleaf: Suum cuique, Tho. Hearne, '
Aug. 19, 1731. Bought of Mr. Fletcher of Oxford, Book-

seller.'
The title, on f. 86, is

'
Expositio simboli Athanasii episcopi

secundum Magistrum Alexandrutn nequam.' The preface
'
commences Dicit Apostolus, Fides est fundamentum,
:
quod immutari non potest. Fides ista valde necessaria est

nobis in conflictu adversus varios hostes, sed illud egregii
versificatoris, Prima petit campum dubia sub sorte duelli.'
It ends :
'
Tres autem sunt simboli vel simbola. Est autem
simbolum apostolorum sive laicorum ;
et simbolum niceni
concilii, quod est simbolum misse est ;

et simbolum Atha-
nasii episcopi hora prima, et qnia plenius
quod cantatur in
et perfectius continetur fides in illo simbolo, ideo de illo
primo dicendum.' The first note commences

'
Opus est :
ut quicunque vult salvus esse id est, quicunque desiderat

;
salutem corporis et anime, quia duplex salus hie notatur,

1
Monasticon, vol. vi. p. 176.
scilicet salus corporis et anime. Et utraque est duplex.
Est enim salus anime temporalis et eternalis. Tempo-

ralis est virtus ; quia, sicut peccatum est mors anime, ita
virtus est salus anime. Salus eternalis est vita eterna. Et

utraque est affectanda.'
This Commentary being perfectly different from the pre-
ceding, it is natural to suppose that the two works are by
different authors. But owing presumably to the resem-
blance of their names, and possibly also to their being
contemporaries, the authors have been confounded by those
whom we rely upon for information respecting them, par-
ticularly Bale, Cave, Tanner, and Oudin. The confusion
appears to have originated at an early period, for Bale pro-
duces a quotation ex catalogo Bostoni Buriensis 1 in which
'
,'
it will be observed that the writer exercises his ingenuity
in accounting for the imaginary fact of the two names

having belonged to the same person. It is as follows :
'Alexander nequam simul in sancto Albano mona-

. . .
chatum petiit atque ad abbatem ita scripsit Si vis, veniam :

;
sin autem, tu autem. Respondit Abbas : Si bonus sis,
venias ;
si nequam, nequaquam. Et ita indignatus, cogno-
mine Neckam mutato, se transtulit Excestriam, ubi multa
in
scripsit.' And we learn from the same source that he died

at Worcester '
in quodam itinere,' and was buried there '
in
claustro monachorum,' the following epitaph being placed

over his grave :
'
Eclipsin patitur sapicntia, sol sepelitur,
Cui si par tinus, minus esset flebile fnnus.
Vir bene discretus, et in omni more facetus,
Dictus erat nequam, vitam duxit tamen aeqttam.'
Hence it seems clear that Necham or Neckam and Nequam

were different persons, and that the latter died at Worcester
1
Scripiorum Britanniae centuria tertia, Appendix. Boston flourished at
the commencement of the fifteenth century.
or in its neighbourhood, and was buried in the cathedral

cloister there. By some authorities however, which are
1
quoted by Tanner the former is ,
said to have died and
been buried at Worcester, the confusion between the names

being no doubt the cause of the error. There seems good
reason believing that Nequam was connected with
for
Exeter, and if so he must have been a canon of the cathe-
dral, unless he was a monk at one of the religious houses

of that city, either the Benedictine Priory of St. Nicholas,
which was a cell to Battle Abbey, or the Cluniac Priory
of St. James, which was a cell to St. Peter's, Cluny ;
but
his name does not appear in the of priors of either
lists
house in Dugdale. Tanner mentions several MSS. con-

taining works by Nequam, and in all probability he was
the author of some among the numerous works ascribed
by Bale to Necham. If Nequam was a canon of Exeter
might have given occasion to the supposition that

this
Necham became a canon regular there, the two names

being confounded.
22. The celebrated schoolman Alexander Hales, .who
flourished a little laterthan Simon Tornacensis and
Alexander Necham, but in the first half of the thirteenth
century, was the author of an important Commentary on the
Athanasian Creed. He also composed Commentaries on
the Apostles' and Nicene Creeds :and the three Commen-
taries appear in his Stmima Theologiae, which was printed at
Cologne in 1622, pars iii.

quaestio Ixix. membr. 2. They
are also extant in the Bodleian Laud MS. Misc. 493, which
is assigned by the Catalogue to the end of the thirteenth
century, but is considered by Mr. Macray to belong to the
firsthalf of the following century. These documents are
not ascribed to any author by the MS. The first is headed,
1
Bibliotheca sub nomine Necham.
'Expositio Symbol! Apostolorum'; the second, 'Symbolum

sanctorum patrum'; the third, 'Hie tractatur de symbolo
sancti Anastasii.' The catalogue describes them thus :
'
Expositio Symbolorum Apostolorum, SS. Patrum, et
S. Athanasiiex Hugone et Ricardo de S. Viet ore.' On

what grounds Mr. Coxe attributed them to these authors
it is difficult to understand. Apparently his eye lighted
upon the rubric ex Ricardo de sco Victore introducing
a quotation towards the beginning of the Exposition of
the Apostles' Creed.
The Commentary on the Quicunqite begins on f. 75 v. of
the MS. The colophon as well as the rubric at the
commencement ascribes the authorship to Anastasius :
'
Explicit expositio symboli Anastasii.' It is also called

' '
Symbolum sancti Anastasii in the opening sentence of

'
the Commentary, and Symbolum Anastasii twice in that
'
upon the Apostles' Creed once in the Commentary on

:
'
the Nicene Creed it is entitled Symbolum Athanasii.'
The exposition commences :
*
Determinate de symbolo
in duabus distinctionibus restat expositio symboli sancti
Anastasii. Divisa est in tres partes prohemium tractatum
'
epylogum.' The
prohemium includes the two initial
'
verses of the Creed. After commenting upon these the

'
Exposition continues Sequitur tractatus Fides autem
:
catholica haec est, et dividitur in duas partes, i distribuuntur

ea que describenda sunt de deitate, ii ea que credenda sunt
de humanitate.' The last verse is the 'epylogum.' This
Commentary does not, like most others, consist of a series
of glosses and notes the method rather is to state the
;
various points of the subject-matter of the text as they
successively present themselves, and discuss them. It is
worth noting that two long passages condemning the several

heresies respecting the Trinity and the Incarnation are
quoted as the words of St. Augustine, but really they are

both from the Liber de dogmatibus ecclesiasticis commonly
attributed to Gennadius, which in the Middle Ages was
believed to be the work of the great Latin Father, and was
cited as his. Once the glosa ' '
is quoted.
MS. belonged formerly to the
This Carthusians at
Mayence, as appears from a memorandum at the bottom

'
of the first page, Liber Carthusiensium prope Magunciam,'
and another at the top of the last page,
'
Codex Cartu-
5
siensium Maguncie.
Another Laud MS. No. iz, Codices Miscellanei, of the
fifteenth century also contains a copy of Hales's Commen-
taries. They commence on f. 107. The author is expressly
mentioned in the introductory words, 'De distinctione et
expositione articulorum fidei secundum Alexandrum de
Hallis in fine sui tercii,' and again
colophon after the in the
'
Athanasian Creed, Explicit expositio trium simbolorum
fidei catholice secundum magistrum Alexandrum de Hallis
in fine sui tercii.' The Quicunque is headed 'De simbolo

Athanasii,' and in every instance, I believe, where it is
referred to, is ascribed to him, not to Anastasius.
23. Several works by Richard Rolle of Ham-

in Latin,
pole, were printed at Cologne in 1536, and among them

Commentaries on the Lord's Prayer, Apostles' Creed, and
1
Athanasian Creed . The Commentary on the Athanasian
Creed, preceded by that on the Apostles' Creed, was
reprinted in 1627 in the Bibliotheca Maxima Patmm*.

'
It is Symboli Athanasiani expositio clarissima
entitled
per D. Richardum Pampolitanum eremitam.' Probably it

1 '
D. Richarcli Pampolitani Anglo-Saxonis Eremitae in Psalterium . . .
Davidicum atque alia quaedam sacrae scripturae monumenta pia enarratio. . . .
Coloniae, MDXXXVI.' There is a copy in the British Museum, once the

property of Archbishop Cranmer, whose autograph appears on the first page.
2
Tom. xxvi. p. 624.
formed originally part of a Psalter with a gloss or com-

ment, for among Hampole's works in Latin in the Cologne
book are Commentaries on the Psalms and the Old Testa-
ment Canticles usually found in Psalters, and these bear
internal evidence of genuineness.
Richard Rolle was a famous preacher and venerated
hermit in Yorkshire during the former part of the fourteenth
century. He died at Hampole, near Doncaster, in 1349.
Wharton, Tanner, and others say that he was an Augus-
1
tinian friar .
This Commentary is clearly drawn from the Commentary

noticed in section 8 of this chapter, which commences
with the words '
Haec ratio fidei catholicae,' and of which
a copy is Bodleian MS., Canonici, Bibl. 30.
preserved in the
The former contains nothing I believe which is not to be
found in the latter. There are two differences discriminating
one from the other. First, the two commencing notes in
the latter are transposed in the former, which consequently
begins not with the words Haec ratio,' &c., but with the
'
words '
Hie beatus Athanasius liberum arbitrium,' &c.
And, secondly, all the Oratorian notes on the Creed
between the fourth and thirtieth verses exclusive which
appear in the latter Commentary are omitted in the former.
The Commentary contained in the Canonici MS., it will be
is a compilation of notes from the Stavelot and
recollected,
Oratorian Commentaries. Waterland was somewhat per-
plexed by the resemblance which he found to exist between
the Commentary of Hampole and one in a MS. at Leipsic
belonging to the twelfth century: and this led him to

doubt the authorship of Hampole 2 The Canonici MS., .
1
See introduction to the Rev. H. R. Bramley's edition of Rolle's Psalter.
Oxford, 1884.
2
See Waterland's History of the Athanasian Creed, chap. Hi. p. 54, note.
which was necessarily unknown to that scholar, and which

doubtless contains the same Commentary as the Leipsic
MS. and the others mentioned by him, solves the difficulty,
for it shows that Hampole's Commentary, though not an
original work, is still attributable to him, as his recen-
sion and abridgement of the Commentary preserved in
those MSS.
A Commentary which appears in a MS. of Magdalen
College, Oxford, numbered 115 in Mr. Coxe's Catalogue
and assigned by him to the beginning of the fifteenth
by Waterland to be none other than
century, was supposed
1
Hampole's Commentary This, however, is certainly not
.
the case. The two documents have much matter in com-

mon, which is derived, I believe, immediately from the
Commentary in the Canonici MS. as its source. But they
are not the same. On the contrary they differ in several
particulars. Firstly, they commence differently; the former,

'
Hec ratio fidei catholice' ; the latter, 'Hie beatus Athana-
sius.' Next, the Oratorian notes or glosses between the
fourth verse Neque confttndentes and the thirtieth aeqtialis,
which are omitted, as before mentioned, in the latter, are
found in the former. Thirdly, some of the Stavelot notes

which occur in the latter do not occur in the former.
Lastly, the former contains a note respecting the Holy
Spirit drawn apparently from Alcuin de Trinitate^ which

does not appear in the latter. With the exception of this
note from Alcuin, the former, I may add, seems to me
drawn entirely from the Canonici Commentary. The
latter is entirely, as previously noticed, from that source.
This Commentary in the Magdalen College MS. is not
It commences on f. 1 70 r. without
ascribed to any author.
any title : at the end a note is added stating that it was

1
Water-land's History of the Athanasian Creed, chap. iii.
pp. 55, 56.
copied from an ancient book, as follows :

'
Hec sunt scripta
a quodam antiquo libro.' From which we may probably
infer that it was of an earlier date than the Commentary
of Hampole, who died little more than half a century
before the MS. was written. It is erroneously attri-
buted by the Catalogue Januensis or de
to Johannes
Balbis. Thus, according to Waterland, the title ascribed
to it by the old Catalogue was Expositio in Symbolum
'
Athanasianum per lanuensem.' And Mr. Coxe has re-

peated and endorsed the mistake by his description, to wit,
Expositio in Symbolum S. Athanasii ex lohannis de
'
Balbis Catholico excerpta.' The occasion of the mistake is
not far to seek. Subjoined to the Exposition is an extract

from the Catholicon or Dictionary of Johannes de Balbis,
or Januensis, respecting the three Creeds and the source ;
from which this is indicated in the following

derived is
words, which are added immediately after Hec lanuensis :

'
in suo Catholicon in verbo symbolum.' To any one exam-

ining the MS. with
the slightest care it must be obvious
that these words do not refer to the Exposition or Com-
mentary, but solely to the passage from the Catholicon.

24. In the latter part of the fourteenth century the
Wycliffe movement produced, as might be expected,

a Commentary in English upon the Athanasian Creed.
This Commentary, attributable either to Wyclif or one
of his followers, for there seems to be no certain evidence
that it was Wyclif s own work, is found together with an
English translation or version of the Creed, doubtless by
the same hand, in several manuscript Psalters, subjoined
among the Canticles to Hampole's translation of the

Psalter and Commentary upon it, the Canticles both of
the Old and New Testament being also accompanied by
a version and Commentary in English. Of these Psalters
there are as many as four in the Bodleian Library Bodl.^88,

877, and 953, and Laud Misc. 448. The first two of these,
in the opinion of the Rev. W. D. Macray of the Bodleian
Library, belong to the early part of the fifteenth century

about 1410 ; the third is shown to be of the same epoch
by the fact of the words '
Liber domini Thome
Seignour
de Berkeley' appearing in the decorated border of the
first page of the Psalms, the inference from which is that
the book was written for Thomas fifth Lord of Berkeley,
who died in 1416 ;
it is also connected with him by the
obits of his wife and mother inserted in the Calendar ;
and
a mitre, the crest of the Berkeley family, is painted at the
foot of the same page where his name appears, and again
within the large C of Confitebor, the initial word of the
first Canticle. It is a well-written and handsome volume.
The fourth of these Psalters is assigned to the fifteenth
century by Mr. Coxe's Catalogue. Another is in the
British Museum, Harl. MS. 1806, written about 1430;
another in the Parker Library at Corpus Christi College,
Cambridge, written about 1420; from a memorandum on

the second leaf it appears to have belonged originally to
John Colman, Abbot of Lewes. There may be also other
manuscript copies of Hampole's Psalter containing the

Wycliffitecomment on the Athanasian Creed these that ;
I mention I have seen. From Waterland's description of

a MS. belonging to Trinity College, Cambridge, it would
appear to be a book of this class. Its number in the
Catalogue, as I judge from the list of the MSS. of Hampole
in Forshall and Madden, is 171.
As regards the text of these Psalters, the same arrange-
ment is found in all. Each verse is exhibited in Latin and
isimmediately followed by its version in English, which is
generally underscored by a red line, and then is added the
postil or comment. And this method is maintained
throughout the Canticles, including the Athanasian Creed

as well as the Psalms. But the order of the New Testa-
ment Canticles so-called differs considerably. In Bodl. 288
and 877 they occur thus, Magnificat, Te Deum, Benedictus,
Nunc dimittis, Benedicite, Quicunque vult ;
in Bodl. 953
and Harl. 1806 thus, Te Deum, Benedicite, Benedictus,
Magnificat, Nunc dimittis, Quicunque vult ;
in Laud Misc.
448 and Parker E. i. 387 thus, Te Deum,
Benedictus, Nunc
dimittis, Benedicite, Quicunque vult, Magnificat in the last ;
MS. the Magnificat is followed by a Litany. In all the

Psalters the Old Testament Canticles appear in their usual,
and consequently the same, order. I may add that Ham-
pole's Prologue to the Psalter in English is found in all, but
the apocryphal I5ist Psalm is conspicuous by its absence.
obviously an apparent anomaly in this Wycliffite

There is
Exposition and version of the Athanasian Creed being

subjoined to the Psalter of Rolle of Hampole, considering
that thetwo documents were the issues of different schools
of thought. How is this to be accounted for? In the
Bodleian Library is a MS., Laud Misc. 286, which serves
as a key for solving the mystery of this seemingly ill-
consorted union and sheds a flood of light upon the above-
mentioned Psalters. It is a copy of Hampole's glossed
English Psalter with the six Old Testament Canticles and
the Magnificat annexed but nothing else, and was written
in the reign of Henry the Sixth. At the commencement
of the book, written by the same hand as the rest of the
volume, are a set of verses respecting the Psalter in general

and Hampole's Psalter in particular, in which, to quote the
Preface of Forshall and Madden to their edition of Wyclif's
'
Bible (vol. i. Preface, p. v),

'
the writer states that the work
'
(i. e. Hampole's Psalter) was undertaken at the request of

dame Margaret Kirkby, a recluse probably at Hampole ;

that
the autograph copy of the author was still remaining at the
nunnery attached by chains to his tomb that the writer's ;
was a faithful transcript from the original, and that many

copies in ordinary use had been corrupted by the Lollards.'
The lines referring to our subject are as follows :
'
Therefore a worthy holy man cald Richard Hampole,
Whom the Lord that all thingus can leryd (i.
e. taught) lely (truly) on his
scole,
Closed the Sauter that sues (follows) here in Englyche tong sykerly
At a worthy recluse prayer cald Dame Merget Kyrkby.
This same Sauter in all degre is the self in sothnes,
That list at Hampole in surte, at Richards own berynes,
That he wrote with his hondes to Dame Merget Kyrkby,
And ther it Iy3t in cheyn bondes in the same nonery.
In Yorkshire this nonery ys, who so desires it to know,
Hym thar no way go omys, thes ben the places all on row,
Hampole the nonery hyjt (called) betwene Dancastir and Pount-freyt,

This is the way to mannys syjt, even streysth without deseyt.'
'
Copyed has this Sauter ben of yvel men of Lollardry,
And afturward hit has been sene, ympyed (filled) in with eresy.
Thei seyden then to leude foles, that it shuld be al entir,
A blessed boke of hur scoles, of Rychard Hampole the Sauter.
This lie thei seyd to make theim lene on her scole thoro sotelte.'
Fromthese lines it may be inferred that Hampole's

Psalter was an incomplete work, containing nothing but the
Psalter itself, the six usual Old Testament Canticles, and
the Magnificat, with their respective versions and comments
in English, these being the contents of Laud 386, which the
writer describes as the exact counterpart z';z all degre the
self in sothnesof the autograph copy of Hampole, which

was time in the nunnery at Hampole, the burial-
at the
place of the good man, secured by chains in accordance

with the custom of the age. For there is no appearance
of the Laud codex being
imperfect owing to mutilation ;
no reason to suppose that it ever contained more than it

does at present on the contrary it does not seem to have
:
lost a single leaf; the Magnificat closes in the middle of

the second column of the final page the book being
written m two columns and it is followed by the rubric,
'
Explicit Canticum Mar. Matris dni nri ihu cristi.' And

this conclusion that the Psalter of Hampole was incomplete
ending with the Magnificat is confirmed by the fact that
the MS. ofbelonging to Sidney Sussex College, Cam-
it
bridge, which the earliest MS. extant of the book, being

is
assigned to the close of the fourteenth century, ends also

with the Magnificat it has no other New Testament or
:
Ecclesiastical Canticle, and comprises the same contents as

Laud 286. cannot
It be supposed that Hampole designedly
left his Psalter thus incomplete. No doubt he was pre-
vented finishing it by some unavoidable cause, possibly
failure of health. This incompleteness would naturally
create the sense of a need. In proportion as people valued
the work of Hampole as enabling them to make an in-
telligent and profitable use of the Psalms and some of the
Canticles sung in the Offices of the Church, they would
desire that it should be completed by a supplement, so to
speak, containing the Canticles not included in it, viz. the

Te Deum, Benedictus, Nunc dimittis, Benedicite, and Qui-
cunque and constructed upon the same model, each
vult,
Canticle having its prologue and version and comment in
the vernacular. Wyclif or one of his followers, it would
appear, resolved to supply the desideratum and the result ;
is seen in the composite Psalter, of which we have copies in
the above-mentioned MSS., and which, if we may judge

from the number of copies several written in different
dialects even now existing, must have obtained a large
circulation throughout the country. Whoever was the
compiler, it is clear from the MSS. Laud Lat. 448 and
Bodleian 953 that he transferred Hampole' s work into his
s
book with little alteration, if any his text, as it appears in

:
Laud 286 and Mr. Bramley's edition, is simply reproduced

in them, saving that a word here and there is transposed or
altered, one more common and better understood being

substituted for another that was rare and perhaps obsolete.
'Copyed has this Sauter ben of yvel men of Lollardry.'

But subsequently it was much altered and interpolated in
places by revisers and copyists, as may be seen in Bodleian
MSS. 288 and 877. To these and the like copies possibly
the writer of the lines in Laud 286 refers when he adds :
'
And afturward was
sene ympied in with eresy.'
hit
I have been guided some degree to this account of the
in
glossed Psalter in the above-named MSS. by the Preface

of Mr. Arnold to the Canticles with their versions and ,
commentaries edited by him from Bodl. 288 After re- J

.
ferring to the Laud MS. Lat. 286 as the key to the

solution of the question how far the Psalter is attributable
to Hampole and how far to Wyclif, he adds that the
Laud MS. '
containing only seven Canticles/ viz. the six

Old Testament Canticles and the Magnificat, has not '
a single word that might not have been written by Ham-
pole.' Then with regard to Bodl. 288 he continues, that

' '
containing twelve Canticles it has in it, especially in the

'
Commentary on the Benedictus, passages which only Wyclif

or one of his disciples could have composed.' And the
conclusion which he arrives at from these premisses he
' '
states to be,that in this Commentary on the Canticles
that clearly in Bodl. 288 'we have down to the end of the
seventh Canticle a genuine work of Hampole, retouched
in several MSS. by a Lollard hand, but that the five
remaining Canticles are a later addition made either by

1
Select English Works of John Wyclif, edited by Thomas Arnold, vol. iii.
p. 4.
Wyclif himself or by his school.' By the five remaining

Canticles' Mr. Arnold evidently means the Te Deum,
Benedictus, Nunc dimittis, Benedicite, and Quicunque vult,

the seventh being no less clearly the Magnificat, which in
Bodl. 288, as I have before noticed, immediately follows
the six Old Testament Canticles. The obvious conclusion
to be drawn from all this with respect to our Commentary
is that entirely a Wycliffite work, and
it is is in no degree
attributable to Richard Rolle of Hampole.
Our Commentary with its cognate version of the Atha-
nasian Creed is found in another Bodleian MS. Douce 258,

of the fifteenth century; and it deserves particular atten-
tion, as another instance of the apparent anomaly which

we noticed in the Psalter just referred to, viz. the sub-
joining of Wycliffite work to that of Hampole. The MS.

is mutilated, being lost at the end, some
some leaves
probably at the beginning, and some certainly in other

places. The first document at present is the upth Psalm
as numbered in our Prayer Book, but
the Vulgate it is
in
the 1 1 8th in the English version of Hampole with his
comment. This is followed by Psalms 139 and 22 to 31

inclusive, all also in the version of Hampole with his
comment These are also of course numbered differently
in the Vulgate, each being numbered one below its number
in the Anglican version our Psalm 139 is in the Vulgate
:
I should add that the

138, and so on. English version of
the 24th Psalm and the comment upon it are omitted from
the text ;
but the omission is clearly accidental, the Latin
'
initial words '

Domini est terra being as usual written in
the text, and a note added in the margin stating that this
Psalm would be found at the end of the book. It must
therefore have been written on one of the leaves at the end,
which have been torn away. The version and Exposition
S 2
260 ,
Documentary Evidence, [CH.
of the 3 ist Psalm are not finished, ending at the sixth

yerse. After this on f. 39 the Athanasian Creed com-
mences, each verse in Latin being followed by its Wycliffite
version and comment But at present it is imperfect owing
to the mutilation of the volume, the last words on f. 45 v.
'
being but if crist were wyth the fa,' which occur in the
comment on verse 31 beginning aequalis Patri.' This is '
followed on the next page f. 46 r. by part of the Gospel

for Christmas Day in the later Wycliffite version, beginning
'
owne thingis and
resseveden/ and ending ful of
hise
'
grace and treuthe'; so that it is plain that one or more

leaves have been lost here. The other documents are the
Gospels for Easter Day, Ascension Eve, Ascension Day,

and Saint Thomas' Day, the Epistles of St. James, the two
Epistles of St. Peter, the first and second Epistles of
St. John, and part of his third Epistle, ending with the
'
word '
witnessynge in the sixth verse. They are all in
the last Wycliffite version. Of course in its perfect con-

dition the volume contained also the remainder of the
John and the Epistle of St. Jude, as is evident

third of St.
from a prologue to the seven general Epistles, and also
Hampole's version and Exposition of the 24th Psalm
omitted in their proper place. It is worthy of notice that
all the Psalms in this volume were used in the services of
the Church was no doubt the reason of their
;
and this
selection. Part of the H9th Psalm according to the use

of Sarum was recited at Prime immediately before the
Athanasian Creed, and the rest at the hours of Terce and
Sext and Nones the 22nd to the 26th inclusive were also
;
said at Prime, the 27th to the 3ist inclusive at Matins on

Mondays, and the I39th at Vespers on Fridays. Originally
in all probability other Psalms were comprised.
I have been particular in specifying the contents of this
iy] Commentaries or Expositions. 26 r
MS. show that it is a copy of a book similar in

in order to
design and method of construction to the Psalter previously

noticed. As in the latter the Wycliffites annexed five
Canticles (including the Athanasian Creed) with a verna-
cular version and Commentary of their own to the Psalter
of Hampole, so in this book they annexed the Creed
together with their own version and Exposition of it,
and their own versions of the Gospels for some of the

chief festivals and of the general Epistles to his version
and Exposition of some of the Psalms used in the daily
Office. Both books were clearly designed to meet the
want, which must have been urgent at the time, of manuals
in the vernacular adapted to assist the people in joining
devoutly and intelligently in the Services of the Church.
There was nothing therefore exceptional in the Wycliffites
supplementing Hampole's Psalter with works of their own.
Nor need we suppose, with the writer of the lines in Laud
286, that they did so for the purpose of fathering their
tenets upon Hampole. Probably the course they adopted
was the necessary result of circumstances. Hampole's
Psalter was in possession of the ground it was a useful ;
and popular book ;

moreover itwas not prohibited by the
ecclesiastical authorities. They had nothing to substitute
for it ;
and therefore to utilize and supplement it, as
occasionrequired, was their only alternative. At the
same time they must have had sufficient sagacity to
perceive that this would be the most likely means of
disseminating their own writings and their peculiar tenets.
In a British Museum MS. Addit. 10046, of the
fifteenth century our Commentary and version are sub-
joined to a Psalter, which is distinctly different from that
previously mentioned. The Psalms are in English as well

as Latin, the version being the later one of Wyclif, but
they are preceded by Hampole's English Prologue. They

have no comment. All the Canticles, with the exception
of the Qiiicunque vtdt, are also without any comment.
The Old Testament Canticles, like the Psalms, have the
later Wycliffite version, and so too the Benedictus and
Nunc dimittis : but it notable that in the Magnificat
is
Hampole's version is followed generally, with a few readings
adopted from Wyclif.

Lastly, in the Bodleian MS. Laud Misc. 174, of the
fifteenth century, is an instance of our Commentary and
the version always associated with it appearing in a collec-
tion of works of practical piety and devotional reading.
In this volume it is immediately preceded by the Bene-
dicite with its Wycliffite version and Exposition. These
two documents, it will be remembered, occur in the same
order in Bodl. 288 and 877, Laud Misc. 448, Parker E. i.
387, and I may add also Magd. Coll. Oxford 73. Here they
'
are preceded metrical paraphrase of the seven Peni-
by a
tential Psalms with prologue by Hampole,' as stated by the
Catalogue and they are followed by the lyf of Oure lady

;
'
Seynt Marye,' a meditation by Bonaventura on our Lord's

Passion and Descent into Hell to be read at different
Hours,
{
a short rule of lyf for ich man in general and
for prestis and lordis in special/ rules for confession of
sin,a meditation of St. Anselm, and three documents as-

signed to Hampole an exposition of Psalm xxxvi. 20,
a meditation or instruction on the Day of Judgement, and
'
the myrrour of synners.' Thus our document was circu-
lated in books reading and devotion as well
for private
as in those intended to assist persons in the Church

Services.
This Wycliffite Commentary with the version attaching
is editedby Mr. Arnold from Bodl. 288 in the third volume
of his edition of Wyclif 's select works 1 together with the ,
other Canticles and their versions and commentaries. It
should be remembered, however, that he does not attribute

the versions and expositions of the Old Testament Canticles
to Wyclif or his school indeed they cannot be of Wycliffite
:
authorship, as they are found in Laud Misc. 386, and must

therefore be the work 388 and 877
of Hampole, but in Bodl.
they have received interpolations, which do not appear in

other MSS.
I subjoin some passages of the Com-
characteristic
mentary from Addit. 10046, the text of which I believe

agrees materially with the texts of the other MSS. Indeed
the differences between them appear to be such only as
may be accounted for by the variations of dialects and the

errors of copyists.
The Prologue is remarkable :
'
It is seid comunli that
ther ben thre credis ;
the firste is of apostlis that men
2
knowen comynli the crede of the chyrche
;
the tothir is
that declareth the formere crede this thridde 3 crede is of ;
the trynytie, the which is songen as a salm and was maad

4 5
in greke speche of oon that is clepicl attanasy, and aftir
turnyd to latyn and sundel amendid and ordeyned to be
7
seid at the firste our This psalme tellith moche of the.
trinytie, and it is no nede here 8

to knowe it, syth a man
may be saved if that he bileveth in god and hope that god
wole teche him aftirward that is nedful, and so men seien
comunly. Men bileven in two maneris, summe bileven
god and summe bileven con-
9
expresly that ther is but o
fuseli houever god wole that thei trowe, and if thei lyven
:
on othere side ri3tly as god wole that thei lyven, thei ben
2 3 *
1
pp. 71-81. i. e. the other or second. third. one.
7 8
5
called. partly. hoxir. Before 'here' Harl. 1806 inserts
D
Clearly for oon, or one.
'
iche man.'
in good wey for to come aftir to blisse, for our crede

schulde be medlyd l with love and bileve.'
The following is the comment on the first verse :
'
ffor
2
ther bi is a man saved and it semeth not ynow men to
seie bi word that thei bileven fully as holy chirche bileveth,
for thus sein 3
peynyms and many out of bileve, sith men
seien comynle that thei han al siche bileve: and so love
and good lyf ben nedful to rist bileve. And god forbede
that men bileven that ech man 4 schal be savid mut 5 trowe
expresly ech word that here is seid for fewe or noon ben
6
;
in that staat or grekis or latyns, and ît to us failith
englische to telle that litel that we bileven ffor bileve is of ;
truthe that before our langagis, and, as we seien, god

is
giveth bileve bothe to children and to men, al if 7 thei ben
not of power to lerne bileve of ther britheren.'

Part of the comment on verse 21,' theSon is of the Father,'
is as follows :
c
And heere clerkis moten wake her wittis
and understonde two birthis, the firste is not makyng of
thing but cause ther of with outen ende. And if the sunne
were nevere maad as erroure of clerkis hath ofte seid, Bit
8 9
this sunne wolde cause his lijt ethir with inne ethir with
out, so the first persoone bryngith forth the secunde per-
sone ;
as god, for power to knowe himself, knoweth himself
fully.'
With the above, particularly the words 'god for power
to knowe himself/ &c., it may be of interest to compare
the following from Wyclif's Trialogus, which, as it was
written at the close of his life, may be taken to represent
1 2
mixed. enough.
3
Laud 448 and other MSS. read 'paynyms,' i. e. pagans.
4
After 'man' Harleian 1806 and other MSS. add that.' '
8
Harleian 1806 reads 'mot,' other MSS. mote,' i. e. must.'
c 7 8 '
none. although. Bodl. 877 reads either.'
9 '
Bodl. 877 reads or.'
his mature opinions :

{
Cum sit deducibile quod Deus sit
actus purus, infinitissime intellectivus, certum est, quod
habet potentiain ad se et ad alia cognoscendnm, et ilia
potentia dicitur Deus Pater. Et, quantum potest se ipmm
cognoscere, tantum necessario cognoscit, et ilia notitia dicitur
1
Deus Films .'
The comment on the last verse is also notable :

'
And,
al;jif this crede acorde unto prestis, netheles the hijer
prelatis as popis cardinalis and bischopis schulde more

5
speciali kunne this crede and teche it to men undir hem.

When Wyclif shortly before his death was cited to the
in his reply he said, I suppose over this
{
court of Rome,
that the pope be most oblished to the keping of the gospel
among men that liven here. For the pope is highest vicar
that Christ has here in erth V
25. At the end of the Commentary of Dionysius Carthu-
sianus on the Psalms and Canticles, printed at Cologne in
T 534> subjoined a long Exposition of the Athanasian
is
Creed attributed to the same writer. The editor implies

thatits genuineness might be disputed, but affirms that it
was the work, if not of Dionysius himself, of some person

who was a member of the order to which he belonged, and
also a diligent student of his writings. Dionysius was
a voluminous writer, and was honoured with the designa-
tion of 'The Exstatic Doctor' he is sometimes surnamed :
Ryckel from his birthplace, which was situated in the

Diocese of Liege he died in 1471. :
26. Another Commentary of the fifteenth century that

of Petrus de Osoma, called also Oxamensis or Uxamensis
from his birthplace Oxoma, now Osma, in Spain is noticed
by Waterland, who had met with a printed copy of it.
1
Wiclif, Trialogtts, lib. i.
cap. 6. Oxon. 1869.
2
Hardwick's Church History ', p. 411, note.
A copy of the same book is now in the Bodleian Library.

The Exposition is entitled
'
Commentaria magistri Petri
de Osoma in simbolum Quictinqiie vult salvtis esse' In the
prologue Athanasius is stated to have composed the Creed

when he was in exile at Treves in the year 350 and it is ;
asserted that this is proved by the chronicles of the
Emperors and Popes and the legend of St. Athanasius.

It is described as having for its design to oppose the
impiety of heretics, especially of Arians ;
and it is added
that it was sung in the choir as a psalm, and on that
account was called a psalm. It is here, as in the Com-
mentary of Alexander Hales, divided into three parts, the
'
'
prohemium contained in the first and second verses, the

'tractatus,' and the concluding verse. In the Exposition
'
'
defined to be quod in natura rationali dis-
'
is
persona
tincte subsistit' Frequent reference is made to St. Thomas,
viz. Aquinas, and there is frequent mention of St. Athana-
sius as the author. The colophon is as follows :
(
Com-
mentaria magistri Petri de Osma in simbolum Quicimque
mdt salmis esse finiunt feliciter :
impressaque parisius (sic)
per Udalricum cognomento Gering.' This points to the

close of the fifteenth century, when Gering carried on the
printing business at Paris, as the probable date of the

publication of the book. We
are furnished by Fabricius *
with some particulars respecting Peter de Osma. He was
Professor of Theology and a Canon of Salamanca, and in
1479 wrote a book upon the subject of Confession, which

exposed him to the imputation of false doctrine. His
case being tried by the Archbishop of Toledo, Alphonsus
Camillus, in a Synod held at Alcala, he was anathematized
and his book was condemned by the Pope to be burnt.
1
Bibliotheca Latino, mediae et infunae aetatis.
Upon this he made a formal abjuration of the opinions

imputed to him, submitted himself to the judgement of
the Archbishop, and declared his acceptance of the faith
held by the Pope. He is described by Antomus Nebris-
sensis as the facile princeps of his age in every kind of
learning.
Another Spanish theologian of the fifteenth century
27.
is stated by Fabricius and Cave to have composed a Com-
mentary on the Athanasian Creed. Jacobus Perez de

Valentia, an Augustinian, was made in 1468 titular Bishop
of Neapolis in Thrace sive Christopolitanus,' and suffragan
c
to Roderic Borgia, who was then Cardinal and Bishop of
Carthagena and Portus as well as Valentia, and was after-

wards, in 1493, advanced to the Papal throne under the
title of Alexander VI. The latter was a native of Valentia.
Perez died in 1492. He wrote a very elaborate and copious
Commentary on the Psalms and Canticles, and dedicated
it to Borgia,whom he described in the dedicatory address
as 'Ecclesiae Valentinae praesul, cuius vices ego, licet
immeritus, gero.' work passed through several

This
editions, for it was
printed at Lyons in 1499, and in
first
the sixteenth century was printed again and again at Paris

and Lyons and Venice. Of these the Bodleian Library
contains a copy of the Paris edition of 1509 by Johannes
Petit and Badius Ascensius and the British ;
Museum has
three copies, the first another edition by
belonging to
Petit and Ascensius dated 1518, the second to an edition
published at Paris by Nicolaus de pratis in 1521, and the

third to an edition printed by Francis Regnault at Paris in
1533. In all four copies I searched in vain for the Com-

mentary on the Athanasian Creed, expecting to find it
in the usual place subjoined to the Commentary on the

Canticles, especially as Fabricius and Cave both mention
1
it in that As it seems highly improbable
connexion .
that these authoritieswould have asserted without good

reason that Perez was the author of a Commentary on the
Quicimqtie, I presume either that it is printed in other

editions of his Psalter which I have not seen, or that it
was composed by him as a separate work, distinct from his
Commentary on the Psalms and Canticles.

In concluding these notices of the Commentaries on
the Athanasian Creed, it seems to me desirable to draw
attention to some circumstances respecting them. Firstly,
their number is considerable, and they range in date from
the end of the sixth or the beginning of the seventh
century down to the latter part of the fifteenth, em-
bracing a wide field of study and inquiry which I feel
that I have touched only upon the surface. Some of them
it has been my lot to be the first to notice, but I am far
from supposing that I have produced an exhaustive list

which is incapable of being enlarged by future research.
Secondly, between several of these Expositions or series of
notes for of them were, written in the margin
such many
of the text or between the lines a connexion may be
traced, the earlier, in particular that attributed to Venantius

Fortunatus and the Oratorian and Stavelot Commentaries,
being used as sources from which subsequent compilers in
part at least drew their materials. This was the case more
especially prior to the thirteenth century; but even in the
fourteenth we find Richard Rolle of Hampole constructing
his Commentary out of another of a much earlier date,
which was nothing but a compilation from two other
Perez, Fabricius in his Bibliotheca mentions Com-

1 '
Among the works of
mentarius in Psalmos et Cantica ferialia in Bibliis contenta et in Cantica
Evangelica, Te Deum, Symbolum S. Athanasii.' Cave, in his Historia
et in
Litteraria, also mentions Perezius's Commentary on the Athanasian Creed in

connexion with his Commentary on the Psalms and Canticles.
Expositions belonging to a yet higher antiquity. Another

point calling for notice is our ignorance respecting the
authorship of most of these documents. Previous to
the thirteenth century there are but two Commentaries
the authors or compilers of which are known for certain ;
was very brief, and that of Bruno,

that of Abelard, which
which does not seem to have been an original work, but
merely a revision of an earlier Commentary supplemented
by some passages from the Fortunatus Exposition. Hilde-
garde's work I pass over as not properly coming under the
category of Commentary.
CHAPTER V.
VERSIONS.
HITHERTO we have noticed none but Latin copies of

the Athanasian Creed, which claim the first consideration
by reason of their greater antiquity as compared with

those in other languages in which it is found. But no
account of the Creed would be complete which omitted to
take notice of the latter as well as the former.
I. Of the versions or translations of the Qziictinqzie as
we must assume them to be at present, reserving for later
consideration the question in what language it was com-
posed those which demand the first notice for importance

and interest are clearly the Greek. In Montfaucon's
Diatribe de Symbolo Quicunque there are four different
Greek versions of our Creed.
(a) The firstof these had been previously twice edited,
by Felckman in his edition of St. Athanasius at the com-
mencement of the seventeenth century 1 and by , Eustratius

Zialowski in a collection of similar documents subjoined to
a brief account of the Greek Church, being copied no doubt
2
by the latter from the' former . Montfaucon says that it
was edited by Felckman ad fidem Palatinorum codicum :
but this is incorrect, as the latter expressly states in his
1
S. Athanasii Opera ex Officina Commeliniana, 1601, torn. ii. p. 38.
2
Eustratii lohannidis Zialowski Rtitheni brevis delineatio Ecclesiae Orientalis
Graccae , . . cum notis evulgata a Wulfgango Gundlingio. Noribergae, 1681.
Versions. 271
Appendix of various readings that it was from a MS.

described by him as noster codex II anonyimis^ meaning
apparently, as we judge from the preface, that this was

the second of the MSS. used by him for his edition of
Athanasius and thatit belonged to an anonymous owner *.
Unfortunately he gives no further account of the MS.

beyond mentioning that the Creed as contained in it is
without title or name of author ;
but he adds the title
(rw/A/SoAoy TOV ayiov 'AOavao-Cov from a Palatine codex, and

also several various readings of the text as compared with
his own. may be safely affirmed to
This Palatine codex
be identical with the Greek Palatine codex 364 in the
Vatican Library, in which the Quicunque appears with the
titleand readings noted by Felckman. Such I gather to
be the case from collations of the MS. kindly supplied
to me by Mr. Bliss of the Record Office. The Palatine
collection in the Vatican, it must be recollected, was
brought to Rome from Heidelberg (its original home) in
1623, being presented to Pope Gregory XV by Maximilian,

Duke of Bavaria. From the catalogue of that collection
recently compiled by Mr. Stevenson under Papal authority,

it appears that the MS. to which we are referring was
written partly in the fourteenth and partly in the fifteenth
century, our document being comprised in the former

2
part It is described as formerly the property of Papa
.
Nathaniel and we learn from the Prolegomena that it

\
must have been one of fifteen manuscripts sold in the year

1550 by this Nathaniel, a Greek Priest, to Fugger, who in
token of gratitude to the Elector Frederick IV bequeathed
1 {
Extat hoc symbolum in nostro codice II anonymo, sed absque titulo et
'
nomine authoris ; unde et sic edittim ; u. s. Appendix, p. 83.
2
Bibliotheca Apostolica Vaticana codidlms manuscriptis reccusita. Codices
Palatini Gracci, p. 223.
his manuscripts to the Palatine Library. Montfaucon did

not have access to this Palatine codex, but he made use of
a Paris MS. formerly Reg. 2962, in the present Biblio-
theque Nationale marked Gr. 1286 likewise containing

his first version, but with a different title, viz. rou ey dytW
Trarpos yfJiGtv /u.eyaXov 'AOavaa-fov oôXoyta rrjs avrov Tnarecos.

This he has followed certainly in one reading, as well as
the title. A
few years ago the late Rev. S. S. Lewis, the
learned Librarian of Corpus Christi College, Cambridge,
did me the favour to inspect this MS. for me, and he
informed me that it appeared both to himself and to the
Keeper of MSS. at Paris 'to date from the beginning of
the sixteenth century, or at most from the end of the
fifteenth century.'
This first Greek version of Montfaucon commences, Et

TIS $eA.et crwOijvai 717)6 irdvTwv XP?J ctirw TTJV
TTLCTTii
1
, the Palatine MS.

reads xP a/a
It may also be mentioned that it renders persona in verse 4
elsewhere inroa-Tao-is, coaeterna in verse 6 a-vv-
(and similarly in verse 24), immensus ap-erpos,

aeternus aiamo?, omnipotent both in verses 13 and 14 and
in verse 37 TrayroKpcmop, singillatim /xoyaStKws, sentiat in
verse 26 voetra) : it differs from the Latin in the words of

verse 27 /3e/3auos TriorevTj, but follows it closely in those of
the last verse TUOTCWS re /col /3e/3atW. But what is especially
to be noticed is that in the verse relating to the Procession
of the Holy Ghost the words /cat rov vlov are wanting,
a proof that this version was the work of a member of the

Greek Church. Doubtless the omission was made in
perfectly Believing that the Creed was the
good faith.
composition of St. Athanasius, and that the great Greek

Father held precisely the same doctrine respecting the
Procession which was held and affirmed by Greeks of
v.] Versions. 273
a later age, the author of the version necessarily regarded

'
the ' et Filio as a Latin interpolation, and felt assured
that by not inserting the Greek equivalent of the ex-
pression he was simply reproducing the genuine text of
Athanasius. It would be impossible to ascertain precisely
when or where this version was drawn up. The fact of
the earliest of the two MSS. in which it appears, at
>
present extant or father known to be so, being of the

fourteenth century, is no proof that the document itself
was not produced prior to that date, unless indeed the MS.
could be shown to be the original copy of the author for ;
many MSS. of it must have perished in the wreck of ages.

Probably it is an earlier work. Had it been a product of
the fourteenth century or the fifteenth, we might have
expected in verse 25 novas &

rptaSi K<U rpias kv povabi, the
reading which had become usual at that epoch but we find :
the older form instead, rpias h

novabt. K<U novas tv rpidbi.
Nicholas Hydruntinus, i.e. of Otranto, who flourished at
the commencement of the twelfth century, clearly implies
that in his time, and even before it, there was extant a
Greek version of the Athanasian Creed which did not

contain the phrase KCU e/c rov vlov 1 This can be none other
.
than the version of which we are treating. There does not

appear to be any earlier trace of the document or allusion
to it, nor is it at all probable that it originated much
before. The
readings ds o-apxa and et? 0eo'r7jra in verse 33
' '
imply the corresponding Latin readings in carnem and

'in Deum,' which are rarely found before the eleventh
1
He is quoted by Leo Allatius, de Ecclesiae Occidentalis et Orientalis
vii. p. 887, as saying respecting the
perpetua consensione, lib. iii. cap.
i.
Greeks, on KOI avrol ayvoovffi, TIS o trpoffOrjcras \v TTJ iriarei rov dyiov
'AQavaaiov rrj icaOoXiitri \eyofievr), &s ev r< e\\T]vticw ovx^ TOVTO, onep earl xal
'
en rov vlov, nfptfx trat > OVTS tv T V ovpftoXy. By rd a6/*(io\ov is plainly
meant the Creed of Constantinople.
T
century. 'Pariter' in verse 28, which was the reading of

early MSS. though omitted in the later, is not represented
here by any Greek word. The version may have emerged
at the end of the eleventh century, when attempts began
to be made for effecting the reunion of the Greek and
Latin Churches. The fact of its being well known to
Nicholas Hydruntinus would dispose us to regard Southern
Italy as its birthplace, especially as Eastern and Western
Christendom were there brought face to face one with
another, and the close and constant intercourse existing
between the members of the two Churches, who were there
thrown together, would naturally lead to the examination
and discussion of their religious differences.
(b) Montfaucon's second Greek version has for title,

'
Tou kv ayiois irarpos fm&v 'AOavaa-iov TOV peyaXov ojuoAoyta rfjs
KaOoXutys -Triorrecos fjv eSoo/ce Trpds 'lovXiov Hanav. To this

e
Genebrard, by whom it was first edited, adds P<o/u,?]s. It
commences, To> OtXovri craOrjvai. Trpo Travrcov avaynr] TT\V
Ka6o\LKr]v isia-Tiv /carexeiz/. Persona is always rendered

(UTroz/, and omnipotens iravToovvafjios ;
immensus is a
aetermts aidws ;
the Latin formula in regard to the Proces-
sion is followed, rd Trveujua TO ayiov napa irarpos Kal vlov, ov
iroirjOev, ov KTiarOev, ov yevvr]dev, aAA.' ^KTropevoêvov, this version
must therefore have been the work of a member of the

Latin Church, either a Greek or one who understood
Greek, or possibly of a Greek favourably disposed to the
Latin Church for in the thirteenth century a Latinizing
;
party grew up within the Greek Church. In verse 25 it

follows, like the first version, the older reading, thus rr\v :
Tpiaba ev rfj {jiovabi

Kal TT\V fj,ovaba kv rr\ r/naSi cre/3eu> 8et. In
verse 26 sentiat rendered ^poêtrco.
is In verse 28 /3e/3ata
is a variation from the Latin ; but /j,era r<3z> tSicoy
in verse 38, and TTLOT&S /cat fizfiaCdis in the last

v.] Versions. 275
adhere to it closely. This version was first edited by

Genebrard, Archbishop of Aix in Provence, in 1569, in his
Expositio Symboli Athanasiani subjoined to his Com-
' '
mentary on the Psalms, and was afterwards printed by

Zialowski in the little work already mentioned. Accord-
ing to Montfaucon, the former describes it as belonging to
the Church of Constantinople \ But this is not accurate,
the words of Genebrard being Constantinopolitani sic '
legunt et recitant,' for which statement he does not add

his grounds or authority. have been used by It may
Greek-speaking members of the Latin Church at Con-
stantinople but members of the Greek Church would not
;
have received or recited a version formulating the Latin

doctrine of the Procession.
Montfaucon informs us that was found in this version
a MS. Royal of the numbered Library at Paris,

in his
time 3502, the original owner of which was Johannes
Heraltus Boistallerius, the French Ambassador at Venice
in the reign of
(1560-1574). He adds
Charles IX
a note in Greek, prefixed by the writer to one of the
documents in the manuscript, the Dialogue of Athanasius
with Arius, which is to the effect that he, Zacharias
a priest of Crete, had written the book for Boistaller by
agreement for a certain sum of money. Latin trans- A
lation of this follows ;
and then comes another note in
Latin only, described as written beneath the former one,

and conveying the further information that this book was
transcribed at Venice from a very ancient Cretan exemplar
2
by Zacharias the priest in the year 1562 . It is uncertain
' '
1 '
Ait ille,' i. e. Genebrardus, esse ecclesiae Constantinopolitanae ; Mont-
faucon, Diatribe.
a
Extat in Regio codice 2502, olim ex Bibliotheca lohannis Heralti Boistal-
'
a Carolo IX, Venetias legati.

lerii,
In quo codice haec leguntur ante
Dialogum S. Athanasii cum Ario rb napov (}i(J\iov e-ypd<f 77 Trap" IpoS
:
T 2
however, continues Montfaucon, whether the Creed was

copied from the very ancient exemplar referred to, inasmuch
as, the MS. being a large bulky volume and comprising
a great variety of documents, it is doubtful whether they
were transcribed from one codex or many 1 The latter .
alternative would appear most probably the right one,

judging from the description of the MS. in the present
catalogue of Greek MSS. in the Bibliotheque Nationale, as
well as from that in the catalogue of the same MSS. in the
Royal Library dated 1 740, but especially from the latter as

it is the fullest for a MS. comprising works by writers of
;
the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries could scarcely be

described as very ancient in the year 1562. Besides, the
notes of Zacharias would naturally be understood to apply
only to the document, to which according to Montfaucon

they are prefixed, and which is numbered 36 among the
contents, the whole number amounting to 52. It is a
point however which could only be determined for certain
by a careful examination of the MS. In the existing
uncertainty we are in the dark as to both the antiquity of

the codex from which the priest Zacharias transcribed our
version and the locality which produced it. It should be
mentioned that the MS. in question, which was numbered

2502 in Montfaucon's time, in the present catalogue of
tepews rov Kpijr&s rov Mapcupapa Sid. avvSpopfjs teal fiiffdov rod evSofcordrov Kvpiov
'loi&vvov 'Bo'iffra\\epiov irpeafieajs 'Everlri<ri rov Kafj.irpora.Tov Kal yatyvordrov
rov avQevrov avpov (sic) Kdp\ov Baffc\ccus rd\\cav. eciv evpqre n
Kairoi,
\d6os, avyyvcarf dvffpumvov irdGos rb dpapravetv. 'EppuffBe.' Then, after
a Latin translation of this, it is added: 'Et inferius: " Transcriptus et re-
cognitus liber hie est ex vetustissimo exemplar! Cretico. Venetiis, anno 1562,
'
impensa facta aureorum x Zacharias transcripsit et habuit." Montfaucon,

Diatribe.
1
'Incertum autem utrum ex illo qnod memorat vetustissimo
exemplar!
Symbolum etiam sit mutuatus; codex quippe amplae molis multa et varia
complectitur, qaae dubitare licet ex unone codice exscripta fuerint an ex com-
pluribus.' Ibid.
v -] Versions. 277
Greek manuscripts in the Paris Library and in that of

1740 is numbered 1337.
Another MS. copy of this version is preserved in Codex
cxc, according to Nessel's Catalogue, of the Greek MSS.
in the Imperial Library at Vienna ;
where it is headed by
the same title as in Genebrard, and therefore we may pre-
sume in the Paris MS.also, which probably Genebrard
:
followed . This codex also contains a variety of documents,
twenty-nine in all, the one we are concerned with being the
eighteenth ; and several of these documents are such as to

show be the compilation either of a Latin who under-
it to
stood Greek or of a Greek Latinizer. For instance, our
document immediately preceded by the Apostles' Creed,
is
with each article assigned to one of the Apostles there :
are also quotations from St. Thomas Aquinas on the
subject of the Procession, a collection made by Bessarion

of passages from Latin Fathers and various Councils of
Toledo on the same subject, and works by the Latinizing
Patriarch of Constantinople, Beccus or Veccus, and by
Bessarion likewise, relating to the Procession. It will be
remembered that Bessarion was a Greek who advocated

the Western doctrine of the Procession at the Council of
Florence, afterwards joined the Latin Church, was made
Bishop of Tusculum and a Roman Cardinal, and died in
1473. The fact that this codex includes works written by
him shows that it cannot be earlier than the latter part of
the fifteenth century, though described by Nessel as
'
mediocriter antiquus,' supposing it all to be of the
1 '
cxc. Codex manuscriptus Theologicus Graecus est chartaceus, mediocriter
antiquus et bonae notae in quarto constatque nunc foliis trecentis triginta

duobus ad loannem Sambucam
et olim pertinuit.' Catalogus Codicum
. . .
manuscriptorum Graeconim Bibliothecae Caesareae Vindobonensis. Edidit

Daniel de Nessel, Vindobonae, 1690, vol. i. p. 278. The version begins on
fol. 303.
same date, as would seem to be the case from his ac-
count.
This version would not seem to be so early as the first
version of Montfaucon, but can scarcely be assigned to
a later date than the thirteenth century, as it renders
verse 25 of the Creed So that in all things,' &c. in
c
accordance with the earlier form. The statement of

Genebrard mentioned above would dispose us to see in
Constantinople the locality which produced it. Not im-
probably it emanated from the Latin Church which was
established in that city after its capture by the French and
Venetians in 1203.
(c) We come now to the third version of Montfaucon

the one of all the Greek versions which most claims our
attention and most concerns us. It is also found, but
with some variety of readings, in Labbe and Cossart L
.
It commences "Doris &v (in most editions &v is

omitted)
/3ovA?jrcH <ra>6ijvat } Trpo iravTaav \prj Kpareiv rrjv /cafloAtKTJy THOTW;.
It enunciates the double Procession a proof of its Latin
origin ro irvV(j,a TO ayiov cnrd TOV Trarpbs KGU TOV utou, ov
TioirjTov, ov KTKTTOV, ovoG yevvrjTov, dXA.' fKiropevTov. Other

distinctive renderings are wTro'orao-is for persona in verses
4,5 and 24, as well as in verse 34 aKaraXrjTrros for im- ;
mensus differing from both the preceding versions iravTo- ;
8vvaij.os for omnipotens in verses 13 and 14, but in verse 35

TravTOKparotp ;
lolav or IOLO. for singillatim in verse 19 ; rrjy
fjiovaoa ev rpidbi <re/3ecr0ai Set KCU rqv rpiaba tv povabi in

verse 25 > QpoveiTu for sentiat in verse 26 ; 6p6>s
for fideliter credat in verse 27 J ov rpoTrfj rrjs
6S (rdpica aAAa TrpocrXêi rrjs avdpcomT^Tos els 6t6i> in
verse 33 ;
6 dedvOpotTros for Deiis et homo in verse 35 ;
1
Concilia, torn. ii.
p. 1353, edit. 1759.
Versions. 279
T&V o-co/Aarcoy am&v for cum corporibus suis in verse 38 ;
TTIOTWS TriorevoTj for fideliter firmiterque crediderit in the

last verse.
Several editions of this version were printed prior to

those of Labbe and Montfaucon. In the sixteenth century
itwas repeatedly edited, and once certainly in the fifteenth.
For in the year 1497 it was printed and published by
Aldus at Venice in a Book of Hours of the Blessed Virgin
in Greek ; and this may be considered as probably, I should
not venture to say for certain, the first printed edition of it.
The volume is small, containing 116 leaves in i6mo. On

the verso of the flyleaf there is a print of the Annunciation.
The title, printed in rubric, is "'ilpai rfjs af-mapOevov Mapias
K.O.T (!8os Trjs /xo/xaiKr/s av\.rjs. 'Eirra iâA/Aoi rrjs
1
/xerayoias .
Horae beatiss. virginis secundum consuetudinem Romanae
curiae. Septem psalmi poenitentiales cum letaniis et
orationibus.' This is an imperfect account of the contents,
the Litany (which is distinctly Latin in character) and the
Prayers being followed by our version of the Athanasian
Creed, headed by the title in rubric, Sy/*/3oAoz> TOV ayiov

3
A.6ava<riov. Then follow some prayers and lessons for use
apparently at the Aeiroupyta rfjs v-rrepayias Kctl deiTrapfleyou
Mapias, with which the book is concluded. Where the book

was printed and by whom and when we learn from the
colophon, which is in rubric 'Ev ez/erwjcri krvn^Qr] napa aA.8o>'
:
OVK &VGV H^VTOL TTpOVOfJiioV' XlAlOOTO) TerpaKOOriOOTOJ VVVr)K.O(TT(2

-
e/38o//,<o cbro r^s Oeoyovias ere6 ju^yo? TOV <reiSec3z;os Tre/ZTm/ icrra-
fj-evov em apôvros Avyovcrrivov BopfiabiKov rr)v jSacrtAtSa T&V

7ro\eu>v TavTrjv evTvx&s TIVLOXOVVTOS. Possibly this copy of the
Creed Greek has hitherto escaped notice owing to no
in
mention of it occurring in the title. It may be advisable

to add that all the contents of this book are in Greek.
Renouard in his Annales de I imprimerie des Aides describes
it as being extremely scarce. The copy that I met with

is Bodleian Library.
in the
Among the Canonici MSS. in the Bodleian Library is
a MS. written at Venice in 1518 Canonici Greek 116
having precisely the same contents as the book just men-

tioned, except that there is no frontispiece. Wherever
I collated these two books I found such a close and exact
resemblance between them, that I could not help feeling
convinced that the one was copied from the other the
later necessarily from the earlier. The variations seemed
to me few and trifling. Even in the form of the letters
a striking resemblance is sometimes observable. At any

rate, if the MS. was not thus copied from the printed book,
they must both have been reproduced from the same

prototype. The former alternative is clearly the most
probable. As regards size too the two books very nearly
coincide, and there is an evident likeness in the style of
their bindings. The Athanasian Creed in this MS. has

exactly the same text as in the printed book, with the
exception of one trifling variation, and it has the same title.
The colophon acquaints us with the name of the writer as
well as the date when the MS. was written and the place
where. It is observable also that mutatis mutandis it cor-
responds with the colophon in the Aldus book another

note of the relation between the two books. It is as
follows : 'Ev eyertTjo-i typafyQr] VTTO Bepvdpbov TOV (êAt/ucfoou
XiAiooT<3 TTVTaKO(noa-T<2 8e/canj) dySoarw and rrjs deoyovtas eVet
eTH &PX.OVTOS Aeovdpftov Xavperdvov TT)V /3a(ri\iSa T&V -rroAeW
ravTTf]v curves fivioyovvros. On
the flyleaf at the beginning
the names of two former owners are written, 'Vincentii
Contareni, nunc Bernardi Paliae/ and underneath in the

same hand, Mano di Bernardo Feliciano.' It must be
'
remembered that the Canonici collection of MSS. in the

v.] Versions. 281
Bodleian was formed at Venice by Matheo Luigi Canonici,

a Venetian Jesuit, who died in 1805 or 1806. It passed
into the possession of the University of Oxford by purchase

1
in 1817 .
And book of Aldus must have obtained a large

this
circulation, for it was not only copied in manuscript, but it

was several times reprinted and re- edited, and in various
places. First it was reprinted by Aldus himself at Venice
in 1505. The title is entirely in Latin, and is fuller than
in the original :
'
Horae in laudem beatissimae Virginis se-
cundum consuetudinem Romanae curiae. Septem psalmi

cum litaniis et orationibus. Sacrificium in
poenitentiales
laudem sanctissimae Virginis.' On the verso side of the
title-page, instead of a print of the Annunciation which

appears in the first edition, there is the following address
or preface by Aldus, which I think it worth while to
transcribe, as it is reproduced in all subsequent editions :
"AAAOS rots (nrovbaiois eS Trpdrretv. KaXbv TO cnrovfia&iv CTTI

Aoyous OVK apvr]craC[j.r]i> av }
ei TIS amrdôiTo kv TOVTM KOI ra 0eia.
5
E<p' &i
6fj.ov yevrjcreO' eKarzpov, loov r\^v f] Trpo^zvos, Aeyco brj
ravTrjvl rrjy /3w^3A.oy. M?] roivvv OKfetre 6//,iAty avrfi oenj/jiepat
Kal TavTa opOpevo^voL. ZrjTr)Tta -yap TO irp&Tov ^ rou 6eov
/3ao-tXeta. "Eppwcrê. There is no mention of printer's name

nor of place or date of printing on the title-page, but these
we learn from the colophon, which is the same in form
mutatis mutandis as those in the first printed edition and
the Canonici MS. After it is added,
'
Venetiis apud
Aldum mense lulio. M.D.v.' And on the verso of the last
leaf the emblem or sign of Aldus an anchor round which

a dolphin is is printed in rubric.
twisting The British
Museum possesses a copy of this volume.
1
See Annals of the Bodleian Library, by the Rev. W. D. Macray, 1st edit,
pp. 223, 22 j.
A third edition of these Hours of Aldus was printed at
Tubingen in 1514 by Thomas Anselm, as appears from the

(
colophon :
Tou/Siyyas
1
zrwn&Qri Ttapa 0c)/â T<5 'AzxreAâ)
XiA.io0ra> -TrevTaKOo-ioorw reraprw KOI Se/cara) CLTTO rfjs OeoyovLas

Ti fxrjvos juaijuaKr^/Hcopos. Tubingae apud Thomam Ans-
helmum mense Augusto. Anno M.D.XIIII.' A few prayers
are added at the end in this, which are not found in the
1505 Hours otherwise the two books are apparently the

;
same as regards their contents. Of this also there is a

copy in the British Museum.
A was issued by the same printer in 1518 at
fourth
Hagenau. The colophon is as follows Hagenoae ex :

'
Charisio Thomae Anshelmi. Mense Augusto, M.D.XVIII.'

A copy of this also is in the British Museum.
A fifth it would seem was produced at Hagenau by
Thomas Anselm, for the colophon, which omits to mention
the year of its publication, assigns it to a different month :
Hagnoae, ex Charisio Thomae Anshelmi. Mense lanuario.'

'
The Catalogue of the British Museum, which possesses a

copy of the book, dates it, but doubtfully, in the year
1530. Both these books contain the prayers which are
added at the end of the 1514 book, and another which is
not there.
A sixth was printed at Florence by the heirs of Philip
Juntas in 1520. The colophon is as follows per haeredes :

'
Philippi Junte. Anno Domini M.D.XX. Die vero Martii

VII. Leone X. Pont.' This book does not include the
prayers which are added at the end in the three last-named
editions, but closes instead with the Vespers of the Dead.
Of this edition also a copy is preserved in the British
Museum.
A seventh
was issued from the Aldus press in 1521 by
Andrea d'Asola, the father-in-law of Aldus, and his brothers-
v.] Versions. 283
in-law, who on the printing business for some years

carried
after his death, which took place in 1515. The colophon on
the last leaf is, ' Venetiis apud Aldum mense lunio MDXXI.'
On the verso side is the usual emblem or badge of Aldus.
The book is described by Renouardj the Aldine biblio-
grapher, as one of great rarity and value. copy of A it,
which formerly belonged to him, is now in the Bodleian.

An eighth was printed at Paris by Wechel in 1538, as
we learn from the title-page and the colophon, which is
as follows :
*
Parisiis. Ex offidna Christian! Wecheli sub
scuto Basiliensi. MDXXXVIII.' The escutcheon of Basle
was the emblem of Wechel in the early part of his career.
Of this book the British Museum contains two copies and

the Bodleian one ;
another is mentioned by Dr. Swainson.
Three other works, also printed by Wechel, are bound up
in the same volume with it.
Lastly, a ninth edition was printed by Francis Stephens

or Stephanus at Paris in 1543, of which there is a copy in
the British Museum.
I do not pretend to represent this as an exhaustive list
of the early-printed editions of the Horae in Greek, but

only as a list of those of which I have met with copies.
For all I know there may be yet others extant. In every
one of these which I have mentioned the Athanasian
Creed is found, of course in Greek, in the same place
following the Litany and prayers, with the same title,
already stated ^vôXov TOV ayLov 'AOava&iov, and with
scarcely any variation of This uniformity of the
text.
text of the Quicitnque in these books is the more remark-

able, as in regard to their other contents some diversity of
detail is observable. For instance, the concluding prayers
vary a little in the different editions ; and in the Florence
edition, as in the first, there is a print of the Annunciation

on the verso of the title-page, whereas in all others the
preface or address of Aldus, which have transcribed,

I
occupies the same position in : a note written on the flyleaf

of the Bodleian copy of the 1521 edition a former owner
says that after a careful collation of that with the 1505

edition he had discovered several variations of reading,
though to an unpractised eye the two books would appear

perfectly identical, and in substance no doubt they are the
same.
And our version of the Creed in the text, which is found
in thisbook of Hours, first printed by Aldus, appears in
another early printed book of devotion a Greek Psalter,
first printed by Wolf or Vvolf Cephalaeus at Strasburg in
1524. The title is 'ÂATHPION Trpo^rov KOL /Sao-iAe'cos TOV
Ad/3i. Argentorati apud Vvolf. Cephal.' On the verso of

the title-page is a' preface or address similar to that in the
Aldine Hours. It is headed, 'Icoazwjs AeozrroytKTjs rots lep&v
TTpaynaTuv a-TrouSaiois e3 Trparmy, and concludes, /3o\(f)t,6v re
K.z($)6Xaiov TOV TVTroypafpov cTTovbrjii vjuooy dêAAovra eis /*eibi>'
drpwere ao-KeAes. "Eppacrde. The Psalter is followed, as in

the Septuagint, by the apocryphal i5ist Psalm, and then
the Canticles according to the Greek rite are subjoined, all
of course in Greek. After these comes TEAOS, and then
some Greek iambics, the first
being Aa/3i jue'AcoSe juoim/cf/s
&TTOKpHj(f)ov : then the Athanasian Creed preceded by the
same title, as in the books just noticed. I have no doubt,
however, that both title and text were derived immediately

from the Canonici MS., the text being precisely coincident
with that found there, with the exception of two remarkable
variations. In verse 35 els Se avdpairos is read for els eorty
avOpa-jros, and in the last verse eort 57 KatfoAuc?? for Icrrlv %
K.a6o\iKr\. Both of these are
clearly the copyist's errors, and
both are traceable to the same cause the peculiarities of
v.] Versions. 285
the handwriting as is evident from an examination of the

MS. They are mistakes which could not have occurred if
the copyist had had before him one of the printed editions
of the Hours. Another proof of this, though not equally
cogent, is that both in the MS. and the Strasburg book the
Creed is by an abbreviation for the Doxology
followed
Ao'a. Kai vw with a mark of contraction over the last
word and in the printed book the forms of the letters and
of the contraction seem to be imitated from the MS. All
the printed Hours, with the exception of Aldus's first
have simply Aoa. The Qidcunqiie is the last
edition,
document in this volume. At the end is the following
colophon : e/crenr7ra>rai kv 'ApyevTivrj rfj cAeu#e/>a ez> ot/aa
1
BoA.</>tou TOV Ke0aAatou eret. rrjs crom/ptas ^ju<3i>, a0K. M.r]i>l
/3oT?8po/uaw. The British Museum and the Bodleian both
possess copies of this interesting book, and Dr. Swainson

states that the University Library at Cambridge contains
another. The late Mr. Brewer was the first, I believe, to
call attention to the fact of its containing a Greek version
2
of the Athanasian Creed .
This Greek Psalter with the Athanasian Creed subjoined

was reprinted 1533 at Antwerp by Joannes Grapheus.
in
The Antwerp reprint has the address of Joannes Leonto-

nikes on the verso side of the title-page instead of the :
peculiar reading in verse 35 of the Creed els 8e avdpuiros
which is found in the Strasburg edition, it has et? eori

avOpcairos. There is a copy of it in the Bodleian Library.
Both these books appear to have been intended for the
use of the same class of persons, members of the Latin
Church who were enthusiastic admirers and students of
the Greek language, so much so that books of devotion in
1
i.e. 1524.
3
Brewer, Athanasian Creed vindicated, pp. 60, 61, published in 1871.
Greek possessed in their eyes an enhanced value. It can-

not be supposed that they were designed for the use of
adherents of the Greek Church. They must have obtained
a large circulation, especially the Hours, as is shown by the
numerous editions through which passed, and from the
it
fact of its being printed in such a wide variety of localities.

My reason for drawing attention to them is that the text
of the Quictinque which they contain appears to have
some passages our Prayer Book translation
influenced in
of For the same reason I insert a copy of it in
it.
Appendix K,
One more book remains to be mentioned, which contains
our version in the same text, which appears in all these
'
books, collectanea aliquot que Sebastianus Lepusculus
'
Basileensis colligebat' subjoined to losippus de bello
ludaico.' On
the title-page of the volume there is no
mention of these collectanea^ nor of the printer, nor of the
date of printing ;
but at the commencement
is a dedicatory
'
epistle by Lepusculus, addressed domino magistro Severino

Erizbergio ... in Academia Basileensi Decano,' and con-
cluding with the colophon :
'
Basileae ex museo meo in
commemoratione Matthiae Apostoli 24 Februarii.

beati
Anno 1559.' Lepusculus does not say from what source
he derived his text of the Creed ;
but evidently this must
have been the edition of Wolfius, or else the manuscript
copy which Wolfius used. For he reproduces the two
remarkable and obviously erroneous readings, to which
I have drawn attention as appearing in that edition, and
indeed in that alone, viz. ets 8e avdpairos in verse 35, and
<m in the last. The other variations between the two
texts are few and trifling. The title of the Creed is the
same in both.
A few years later, Waterland says in 1569, Gilbert

Versions. 287
Genebrard, who became eventually Archbishop of Aix in

Provence, edited our version with a text differing some-
what, but not substantially, from that of Aldus and the
editions previously noticed. He found it in a manuscript
book Greek relating to the Procession of the Holy Spirit
in
which had been presented in the year 1533 to Lazarus

Baiffius, the Ambassador of Francis the First at Venice,
by Dionysius, the Greek bishop of two of the Cyclades

Zea or Ceos, and Thermia or Kythnos x He adds that .
the book had been decorated in a very elegant manner by

Nicolaus Sophrianus 2 The title of the Creed in this copy
.
is different from that found in all the printed editions of

our version hitherto noticed. It is as follows :
rfjs Kado\LK7Js morels roO jueyaAou 'AOavacriov

'
A\avbptias vpbs 'lovXiov TraTray. Genebrard's text

thus edited from the MS. of Baiffiu,s was re-edited in
Zialowski's book already mentioned.

In his preface Genebrard also adverts to two editions of
our version, both of which are clearly distinct from any
of those to which we have previously drawn attention. The
1
Hoc Symbolum reperi in libro Graeco manuscripto de Processione Spiritus
'
Sancti, quern Lazaro Baiffio oratori Regis Francisci I apud Venetos obtulit
Dionysius Graecus episcopus Zienensis et Firmiensis, an. 1533.' The words
occur in Genebrard's Preface to his edition and Exposition of the Creed which
are printed at the end of his Commentary on the Psalms published at Lyons in
1607. His Exposition of the Creed is there described as ' Gilberti Genebrardi
theologi Parisiensis et Archiepiscopi Aquensis Symboli D. Athanasii Archi-
episcopi Alexandriae expositio ex tertio libro eiusdem de S. Trinitate desumpta
et eiusdem Psalmorum commentariis adiuncta.' From which it would appear
that the Creed with his Exposition of it was edited by Genebrard in his
first
work on the Trinity. Of this book there is no copy I believe in either the
Bodleian or the British Museum but both libraries contain a copy of the
;
Lyons book. Genebrard died in 1599, having been seven years Archbishop of
Aix. The word Firmiensis will be observed in the above passage. Possibly
Firmium or Firmia was the Latin name for Thermia in the sixteenth century.
2
Quern manu sua elegantissime pinxerat Nicolaus Sophrianus Patrum
'
nostrorum aevo vir valde doctus.' Ibid. u. s.

earliest of these was printed by Nicholas Bryling at Basle,

but in what year is not known, as Genebrard omits to
mention the date; it must, however, be assigned to the
middle of the sixteenth century, at which epoch Bryling
carried on the printing business. The other was by Henry
Stephens in 1565. From Genebrard's description
ap- it
pears that the text of the Creed in these two editions must
have been one and the same the later must therefore;
have been a reprint of the earlier 1 This is also evident

.
from the list of seven various readings which he has printed,

headed 'in impres. exemplar.,' in the margin of his own
text from Baiffius, and which he states to be the result of
his collation of their text with his own. Had there been
any diversity between Bryling and Stephens, he would have

given two lists of variants as the result of his collation.
Unfortunately he has supplied no further information in
regard to either of these two editions of our version, so
that we are not aware of what books they severally formed
a part. Dr. Swainson supposed that Henry Stephens's
copy was included in the Rudimenta fidei Christianize
Calvin's Catechism in Greek and Latin which was the

only book, so far as we know, printed by him in the year
2
1565 besides a French Bible and Beza's Greek Testament .
But this was certainly not the case, as the book, of which
I have seen a copy in the Bodleian, contains the Apostles'
Creed only in Greek, not the Athanasian.
Waterland considered Bryling's edition to be the first
which was printed of our version and Montfaucon was

;
under a similar mistake in regard to that of Henry Stephens.
1 '
Cui,' he says in reference to his own copy from Baiffms's codex, '
affine
est, quod olim evulgavit Basileae Nicholaus Bryling, deinde in Gallia, an. 1565.
Henricus Stephanus.'
2
See Stephanorum Historia, by Michael Maittaire, 1
709.
v.] Versions.
This is the more remarkable, as Genebrard, with whose

Preface both these divines were acquainted, speaks of
several earlier editions being disseminated through the
whole of Europe 1 .
The title of the Creed in Bryling and Henry Stephens

is the same as in the Aldus edition and the various editions
which I have noticed as following it, and therefore differs
from that found in the Baiffius codex. The text, while
substantially identical with those of Baiffius and Aldus, is

discriminated from both by some variants, and must conse-
quently have been derived from some independent source
unknown to us. Nor do we know from what MS. Aldus
copied his text In regard to the texts of Labbe and
Montfaucon, Waterland says I take them to have been
'
:
patched up from several distinct copies at the pleasure of

2
the editor or editors .' This estimate would seem to be
correct. Labbe does not mention any manuscript authority
for his text,and Montfaucon evidently compiled his from
the printed editions with which he was acquainted, those
of Labbe and Genebrard and Henry Stephens.
Besides the Canonici MS. which I have noticed there is,
I believe, only one other MS. of our version known as

extant at the present day. are indebted to the late We
Dr. Swainson for some account of the volume in his book
3
on the Creeds ,
and for a printed copy of the text of the
Athanasian Creed which it contains. It is in the Library
at Florence, and has the press-mark Pint. XL cod. 12,
and belongs to the fifteenth century. In this, as in the
Canonici MS., the Creed is apparently attached to a devo-
1 '
Graeca exempla,' i.e. of the Athanasian Creed, 'pridem in totam
Europam divulgata sunt Parisiis, Basileae, aliisque ex locis multis, deinde vero
cum Latino collata per Georgium Vuicelium.' Genebrard, u. s.
2
History of the Athanasian Creed, p. 217, note, edit. Oxford, 1870.
3
P- 47 2 -
U
tional book. The title is the same as in that MS. and the
Aldus books of Hours, and the text also in substance ;
for
there are several variations of reading, but they are of
trifling importance, such as necessarily result from the

errors and slips of copyists, the most important being the
omission of the words in the last verse but one, ot Se ra
(j)av\a ets TO Ttvp TO alaviov, which is obviously due to the
occurrence of the last word immediately before. The
divergence of this MS. from the text of Aldus is sufficient
to prove that it could not have been the copy which he
followed, while the substantial agreement with it is such as

to confirm most of his readings.
There are some notices of this version
by Latinizing
members of the Greek Church, and by Greeks who had
seceded to the Latin Church in the fifteenth and two pre-
ceding centuries, which are of interest as showing that not
only were they conversant with it, but that they also re-
garded it as the genuine work of
Athanasius, and more-
St.
over as showing by consequence that it was the product of

a prior epoch. Not long after the Council of Florence,
held in 1439, a dialogue respecting the points of difference
between the Greeks and Latins and in support of the
conclusions of that Synod was composed and issued by
Johannes Plusiadenus, described as Archipresbyter, the
principal interlocutors being E{iAa/3i7s or Pius, and 'Pa/cez;-
a term of reproach and contempt applied by Latins

SvTrjs,
to any partisan of the Greek Church, and meaning ragged
fellow. Pius is represented as saying : Aim/co, 6 /ue'yas rrjs
eKKA.?](nas orvAos d dzlos rw OVTL KCU Itpos 'Adavacrios ez> rrj
d/xoAoyia 7779 kavrov Trio-Teas, rjv ee0ero Trpos A6/3e/nov Tldirav,
rjs 77 apx 7?} "Ooris &v /3ouA.rjrcu (Ttodrjvai, To Hvev[Jia TO ayiov

airo TOV Ylarpos Kal TOV Tiou, ov TTOLrjrov, ov KTLCTTOV,
ovbe yevvriTov, aAA' CKTropevTov. Ti Trpbs TOVTO tX LS *w&v J

oi>K
v.] Versions. 291
aytos OVTOS Kal rrjs eK/cAr/a-iay bibao-KaXos

l
;
That the
version we are at present considering is here quoted does
not admit of doubt. The reply of Rhacendytes is remark-
able :
"Ayiov /êy Kal StSacr/caXoy ex, Tr\r)v a/x,$i/3aAAa> //T) eti>ai
TT)y prja-iv Tavrrjv yvr)<riov aiirov ;

Pius rejoins : H&s OVK eori
yvr\cria TOV 8i8ao-KaAou rj Combefis supposes that

pfjcns avrr) ;
this prja-Ls or phrase was the Creed itself; but from the
context it clearly appears to have been the words /cat e/c TOV
vlov. The Greeks did not deny the genuineness of the
Creed, but only of these words. It is deserving of notice
that the Creed is here said to have been presented to Pope
Liberius, though in the copy of Genebrard from Baiffius's

codex and in the title to Montfaucon's second version it
is described as having been presented to Pope Julius.

Plusiadenus is considered by Leo Allatius, who edited his
Dialogue in his Graecia Orthodoxy as also by Fabricius
and Wharton, to be identical with Josephus Methonensis,

who was likewise the author of an apology for the Council
of Florence, but Cave does not concur with that opinion.
Our version was also quoted by Manuel Calecas as
follows :
Tavryv yap eay /x>] TLS morcSs mor every, o-a)0^-at ov
bvvarat, &s 6 /êyas 'AOavacnos kv rrj irpos 'lovkiov HcxTrai;

2
'P(oiJt,r]s TTJS TriVrecos 6/x.oA.oyt'a Trpocreflrj/cev . That Montfaucon's
third version is here quoted is plain, as the first reads Trio-rooy
re KOL /3e/3cucos 7Ticrrevo-?y, and the second moreSs KCU /3e/3ato)?
-Trtorevo-?/. The Florence and Canonici MSS. of the third

version both read two Aldine
TTIO-TOJS ina-revcr?;, as do also the
Horae, and Weckel and the Strasburg Psalter, and Lepus-

culus and Bryling, and Stephens and Genebrard. It is
1
See Leo Allatius, Graecia Orthodoxa, Roma, 1652, torn. ii. p. 531.
3
The passage occurs in his work De princ ipiis Fidei Catholicae, cap. x.
eTrt'Aoôs, edited by Combefis, Bibliothecae Auctarium, Pars altera, Paris,
1672.
U 2
true that Labbe has CK Trforeoos /3e/3acos TrtorewTj, which

Montfaucon has adopted from him, but it is quite un-
authorized, and is probably a corruption of the reading of
the first version, Trio-nay re Manuel
/cat /3e/3ai(i>s Trio-revcr??.
Calecas was a Greek by birth, who joined the Latin Church

and eventually entered the Order of Preachers or Domini-
cans. Combefis, himself a Dominican, speaks of him as
'
vir eruditus ac vere Theologus,' and Cardinal Turrecremata,
who belonged to the same order, says of him, Graecus '
magnae sapientiae Frater Ordinis Praedicatorum/ Accord-

ing to the former of these two authorities, he was a sufferer
in the persecution which took place under the Greek
Emperor, Andronicus senior, shortly after the Council of

Lyons, i. towards the close of the thirteenth century l
e. .
We have a third and rather earlier quotation of this

same version. Veccus, or Beccus, the Latinizing Patriarch
of Constantinople, quotes it, and, like Plusiadenus and
C
Calecas, he quotes it as the work of Athanasius O ayios :
'Adavdorios ev rfj o/x.oAoyta rrjs avrov TrtVrecos ^criv, TO ayiov

irvfvâ e/c TOV Trarpos KCU e/c TOV vtov, ov iroiriTov, ov K.TKTTOV, ov
2
yevvr)Tov, dXX' e/cTropevo'jueyoy . Veccus was made Patriarch of
Constantinople 1383 he resigned his office, and
in 1374, in
was banished the year following the remainder of his life ;
was passed in exile; he died in 1298.

Thus this version certainly existed in the thirteenth
century, and in all probability before that. Had it been

the work of the century in which he lived, a learned man
like Veccus could scarcely have been ignorant of the fact.
And it is equally inconceivable, if he had known it to be
See Preface by Combefis to Calceas, De Principiis Fidei, u. s.

1
2
Joannis Vecci, Epigraphae sive praescriptiones in dicta ac sententias sanc-
torum patrum a se collectae de Processione S. S. Spiritus, lib. i, edited in Leo
Allatius, Graecia Orthodoxa, torn. ii.
p. 531.
Versions. 293
so, thathe should have regarded and quoted it as the work

of Athanasius. In his time it must have been invested
with a certain character of antiquity. It is therefore a
necessary conclusion that it must have been produced in
the twelfth century at the latest. But it cannot, as it seems
to me, be assigned with any probability to an earlier date
than the latter half of the preceding century. The locality
where this, as well as the first version of Montfaucon,
originated was probably the south of Italy, or possibly
Sicily, where Greeks and Latins were living side by side,
many of them acquainted with both languages.

(d] Montfaucon was indebted for his fourth Greek version,
Archbishop Ussher, who edited
l
as he himself states ,
to
it in an Appendix to his treatise De Romanae Ecclesiae
Symbolo Apostolico aliisque Fidei Symbolis from a copy

. . .
of Patrick Young, Keeper of the King's Library at St.
James', with a heading in Greek which described it as

issued by the Nicene Council : 'E/< rfjs ayias Kal oi'/cou/xeyifofc
crvvobov TTJS zv Nt/ccua irepl mcrrecos Kara crvvrofjiiav 1
/cat TT&S 8et
Xpumavov. In his letter to Voss pre-

7Horeve6z> rov aXi]Qri
fixed to that treatise Ussher gives the further information
that thebook in which it was contained was a Horology of

Greek hymns, the property of a Constantinopolitan monk 2 .
The document has been also printed in Labbe's Councils

and in Gundling's edition of Zialowski's book before
mentioned.
This version departs more widely than any of those
previously noticed from the Latin. Much of the first part
1 '
Ex quam Usserius ex Patricii lunii apographo mutuatus
Usserio desumpta,
publicam anno 1647.' Diatribe in Symbolum Quicunqtie.

fecit
Quod in Thecarae Constantinopolitani monachi Graecorum hymnorum

3 '
Horologio a Ravio nostro ex Oriente hue advecto Symbolum hoc eo quo

post finem huius Diatribae cernitur interpolatum modo Nicaenae synodo
adscriptum.'
of the Creed that relating to the Trinity has been re-

cast, and the latter part has been interpolated largely with
foreign matter, apparently from some dogmatic discourse
'
or treatise. Montfaucon describes it as plane Trapa
conscripta.' It commences : Et m /3ovAom> o-a>0?jz>ai,
TravTvv aiiT(3 XP e â Kpasrija-ai. TTJZ> 6p6oboov Trumy. Persona is
always rendered vTroVrao-ts ; immensus iravTOKpdToap, which

ispeculiar to this version; aeternus is aldvios in verses
10 and n, as well as 27 and 39; omnipotens in verses 13
and 14 is mwroSvyajuo? ; in verse 19 [j,ovabiK&s fj,tav e/cdoTTjv
vTro'orao-iy for singillatim unamquamque seems to be drawn
both from the first and third versions ;
the doctrine of the
Procession is stated in accordance with the Greek hypo-
thesis, TO Trvtvp-a TO ayiov anti TOV Ttarpos earty, ov Troi^ToV, ov
KTIVTOV, ou yewijTov, d\X' eKTropeuTov ;

in verse 24 ovSeis irputros
r)eo-xaTos oii8et? jmeyas ?? piKpos is very noticeable in verse 25 ;
the later order occurs, /ôvaSa yovv ey Tpid6 Kal rpidba zv

novabi iras XpivTiavos ewe/3eiV0to in verse 26 sentiat is ;
rendered SofaCeVco^ another peculiarity of this version ;

verse
33 is els 8e ov TpaTTfla-a f) (rap aAA.' avaXrjfyQzicra, ets 0eoy ; in
verse 36 the descendit ad inferos of the Latin is entirely
passed over, and the Kal ra^cis of the Creed of Constanti-

nople is substituted for it ;
in verse 37 we have TOU dtov Kal
TraTpoSj TravTOKparopos being omitted ;

and in the last verse,
as in the first, 97 6p66boos TTLO-TIS is the phrase used, not j/
KaôXtKT) Trta-TLs. That

was the work of a Greek
this version
theologian is evident not only from the omission of the Kal

TOV viov, but also from the substitution of 6p06boos for
/ca0oAiK?7 and of Tenet's for descendit ad inferos^ and from

the insertion of several passages from Greek sources. In
all probability it is of later date than any of the versions
previously noticed.
(e) The four versions of Montfaucon are not the only
v.] Versions. 295
Greek versions of the Athanasian Creed known to us at

present, recent research having brought two more to light.
In his work on the History of the Apostles' Creed and
the Rule of Faith 1 Professor Caspari of Christiania edited
,
from MSS. two versions, both distinct from those of Mont-

faucon. The first of the two he derived from Cod. DLXXV
of St. Mark's Library at Venice, a MS. of the fifteenth
century. The codex also contains works of Nicetas Ste-

tatus, an epistle of Johannes Damascenus, and the Com-
mentary of Zonaras upon the Canons, the Creed being the

last document but one. It has for title marts Ka0oA.iK?i rou
dytou 'AOavao-Lov. The text is imperfect at the end, wanting

the two last verses.
Another copy of this version is among the contents of
No. a i of the Greek MSS. in the Canonici Collection in
the Bodleian Library f. 147 b. The title in this case is
different from that in the Venice MS., and is remarkable :
Tov ayiov 'A6ava(riov TOV iiey&Xov, o Xeyovcnv ol Aarivol crvfji-
/SoAoy. The MS. belongs to the fifteenth century : its other

'
contents according to the Catalogue are Anonymi cuius-
dam auctoris dissertatio per modum dialogi inter Graecum
et Latinum habiti super controversiam de Azymis et de
S. Spiritus Processione,'
'
Expositionis in Fidem Christia-

nam '
fragmentum,' Fragmentum tractatus de controversia

inter Graecos et Latinos de S. Spiritus Processione,' lo- '
hannis Patriarchae Hierosolymitani sermones tres de Azy-

mis/ Simeonis Archiepiscopi Hierosolymitani sermo contra
'
Latinos de Azymis cum notulis marginalibus instructus,'

' '
and Theodori Edesseni sermo de Azymis the Creed is :
the last document but one. This copy has hitherto,

I believe, escaped notice.
1
Qnellen zur geschichte des Taufsymbols tmd der Glatibensregel, v. iii.
pp. 263-267. Christiania, 1869.

Another copy, but imperfect, I found in a Greek and

Latin manuscript Psalter in the Vatican Library, having
for its press-mark Vat. 81. This has likewise hitherto
escaped notice. The MS. is written in two columns, the
Latin in one, the Greek in the other. The Latin Psalter
belongs to the Gallican version. Both Psalters are followed
by the apocryphal i5*st Psalm; and to this succeed the
following Canticles in order, all both in Greek and Latin :
i. The Song of Moses in The Song of Moses

Exodus. 2.
in Deuteronomy. 3. The Song of Hannah. 4. The Prayer
of Habakkuk. 5- The Song of Isaiah 1

6. The Prayer of
.
Jonah. 7. The Song of the Three Children Benedicite.

8. The Magnificat. 9. The Nunc dimittis. 10. The Bene-
dictus. ii. The Song of Hezekiah. These are imme-
diately followed on f.
163 by the Quicunque vttli, which
r.
3
title fides catholica, but in the Greek

'
in the Latin has for
has no title. In both it is imperfect owing to the mutila-

tion of the book, in the Greek ending with the words
/3tab'jue0a ovra> rpets of verse 19. The commencement of
the Greek version, including part of verse 8, which appears
on the recto side of the last leaf of the present volume, is
in a distinctly different hand from the codex generally,
and the spelling of this is so very singular and curious that

2
I think it worth while to reproduce it in the Appendix .
Possibly it may serve as a clue to the locality from which

this interesting Psalter issued. It would seem to have
been written from the dictation probably of an Italian by
some unskilled and illiterate person who was called in for
a time to take the place of the ordinary copyist. On the
verso side of the leaf, necessarily the concluding page of
the book at present, the original hand and orthography are
resumed.
1 2
Isai. xxvi. 9-20 inclusive. See Appendix L.
v.] Versions. 297
It may be observed that the Latin Canticles in this
Psalter do not coincide arrangement with

in substance or
the normal Latin use. They were obviously chosen to

correspond with the Greek Canticles. These last are also
somewhat abnormal, the seventh Greek Ode or Canticle
the Prayer of the Three Children, EvAoyyjros el Kv/ne 6 0eos
being omitted, and the Nunc dimittis introduced between

the Magnificat and the Benedictns, and the Song of Hezekiah
added. It is also worth notice that the Latin texts of
the second Song of Moses, of the Song of Hannah, of the
Prayer of Habakkuk, of the Song of Isaiah cap. xxvi, and

of the Prayer of Jonah are all from Old Latin versions, not
from the Vulgate, which is particularly remarkable, as the
Psalter is Gallican. The same isprobably the case with
the first Song of Moses ; but I cannot assert it to be so,
not having copied any portion of that Canticle.
I cannot quote any palaeographical authority for the
date of this MS. It seemed to me to belong to the thir-

teenth century or the fourteenth but it is with the greatest
;
diffidence that I express an opinion upon a question of
palaeography.
A fourth manuscript copy of this version I believe may
be found in a MS. of the Imperial Library described by
Nesselius in his Catalogue as 'CCXLV . . . Codex Theo-
1
logicus Graecus Chartaceus antiquus et bonae notae .'
I think that this is in all
probability a copy of our version,
for two reasons. First, the contents of the book consist
mainly of Greek controversial documents directed against

the Latins, some specially relating to the doctrine of the
Procession ;
and our version was the work of a Greek
theologian, as appears from the title given to it in the
1
Catalogtts Codicum Mamiscriptorum Graecorum Bibliothecae Caesareae
Vindobonensis \ edidit Daniel de Nessel, Vindobonae, 1690, vol. i.
p. 344.
Canonici MS. and from the fact of its formulating the

Greek doctrine of the Procession. My second reason for
so thinking isbased upon Nessel's description of the title
and initial words of this copy ' S. Athanasii Archiepiscopi
:
Alexandrini Symbolum Fidei, cuius titulus et principium Tov

ayiov'AOavao-fov TOV /ix,eyaAou. "(Darts 8' ay /SotfA^rcu aratOijvat,, irpb
pi) KpaTelv rrjy marriv,' Tov ayiov 'AOavaa-iov TOV

&c.
are the initial words of the title of our version in
the Canonici MS., and "O<ms 8' CLV {3ov\r)Tm o-wOfjvai, vpb
TtavTcov xpf) KpaTdv rr)y TT'KTTIV are the initial words of its text
in the same codex.

This description, which thus applies
to the version of which we are treating, does not hold true
of any other.
It will be noticed that Nessel describes the MS. as
antiguus, but it cannot have been written before the middle

of the fourteenth century, as it contains a work of Maxirnus
Planudes, who died soon after 1353. The Athanasian

Creed is the second of the ten contents mentioned in the
Catalogue.
The initial words of the text in the Canonici MS. have
been already mentioned ;
in the Venice and Vatican MSS.
K.a.QoXiK.r\v is inserted before mariv. To note other distinc-
tive characteristics, immensus is rendered aKaraX^Trros, as in
Montfaucon's third version ;
in verse 5 persona is ya.paK.rrip
in all three MSS., but it is Trpoa-uwov in verse 4 ;
the same
word is xapaKTrip in verse 19 in the Canonici and Venice
MSS., but in the Vatican it is VTroVrao-t? ;
in verse 24, which
is wanting in the Vatican, it is
yapaKT^p both in the Canonici
and Venice MSS.; omnipotens is -TrayroSwajuos in verses 13
and 14, but Trcwro/cparcop in verse 37 the verse relating to ;
the Procession, which is wanting in the Vatican MS., is in

the Canonici MS. TO Trvevâ TO a-ytov e/cTro/jewerai e/c TOV
irarpos, Kal avairavo^vov kv utw ov TTOITJTOV k&Tiv, ov KTHTTOV,

Versions. 299
ov yevvriTov, dAA' fKTroptvrov ;

in the Venice MS. it is the
same saving the omission of the words *ai avaTTavoêvov sv
ui<3 ; 24 the reading ovbels 6 Ttp&ros rj 6 HoyaTos, &c.

in verse
is to be noted ; in verse 25 the later form occurs, KCU p,ovas

tv rpiabi Kal rpias kv [JLOvabi rt/xao-^co ;
in verse 27 for fideliter
credat we have ey Trtoret oreppa Trtareuera) ;

in verse 33 for
non conversione, &c. there occurs in the Canonici MS. /AT)
Tjocnreio-Tjs rrjs OeoTrjTos eis (rdpKa, dAAa eycoêtVrjy in the

Venice aAAa ATj^fleiV??? kv T<S 0ew ;
in the last verse firmiter
fideliterque crediderit is Tnor&s KOL a-repp&s Trto-revo-rj in

Canonici ;
in the Venice MS. this verse is wanting.
This version has several peculiarities, which discriminate

it from all others, especially as regards the use of the word
XapaKTTjp for persona but some passages bear so close
;
a resemblance to the third version of Montfaucon that it

is impossible to avoid the conclusion that they were
borrowed from it. And if such is the case, this version
must necessarily be the later of the two.
(/) Caspari's second Greek version was edited from a MS.

in the Ambrosian Library at Milan, which he describes as
written in the sixteenth century and having its original
home in Calabria. This in general follows the first version
of Montfaucon, and appears for the most part to have been

drawn from it but it is very remarkable that in the verse
;
relating to the Procession it follows rather his third version,

as will be obvious from a comparison of the verse as found
in these three versions.
The first of Montfaucon :
TO TTêu/xa ro ayiov diro TOU Trarpoy, ov TreTrotTjjuei'oy ovre
, aAA'
The third of Montfaucon :
ro Trvevfj-a TO ayiov airo TOV Trarpbs KCU TOV vlov, ov TroiTjroV, ov

5
KTLOTTOV, oiibe yevvyTov, dAA e/

300 .
Documentary Evidence. [CH.
The second of Caspar! :
TO irvevfJia TO ayiov airo TOV vrarpos KCU vlov, ov TTOIJJTW OVT
KTKTTOV, OVTG ycvvqTov, d\A' e/c7ropevroy.

Hence it is evident that the compiler was either a Greek-
speaking member of the Latin Church or a Latinizing

Greek. In a few other instances also he adhered to the
third in preference to the first version of Montfaucon.
Thus we have avev StorayiuoS for Tracnjs a/A</H/3oAi'as eicTo?,
aKaTaXrjTTTOS for a/êrpos, TncrT&s ma-reva-p for /3e/3aa>s marewrj.

It is clear that this version must be later than both of
those from which it was borrowed.
(g) It remains lastly to take some notice of the version
which is included with some other documents in an Ap-
pendix to the Greek Horology printed at Venice in 1868
and other years.
An authentic account of this version is supplied by
a note, subjoined to it, which states that it was resolved
'
that the above Symbol of the great Athanasius, having

been compared with the most ancient manuscripts pre-
served in the Library of Saint Mark, and having been
found to be consonant with them, and not only genuine
but also in unison with the mind of the Orthodox Church,
should be printed for the copies printed at Paris and
:
elsewhere differ in regard to terminology as well as
meaning, but this, being in no respect at variance even

with that printed at Moscow, has been here added with
a pious intention.'
The version is clearly nothing but a compilation from
the first and third versions of Montfaucon, but unlike the
second of Caspari in the verse relating to the Procession it
adopts the language of the first of these, which is in
accordance with the Greek hypothesis. The note of which
we have given a translation supplies a clue which leads us
V,
] Versions. 301
to regard it as a comparatively modern compilation. For

the copies of the Creed there mentioned as printed at Paris
and elsewhere, and described as differing both in termino-
logy and sense from a copy printed at Moscow with which
this version was in exact accordance, could be none other
than copies of some of the editions of the third version of

Montfaucon, which, as I have shown, were printed at Paris
and other places, including itself, between the years
Venice
1497 and 1Considering
569. the contrast so strongly
emphasized in the note between this version and those
copies, together with the assertion of the genuineness of the

former, it is difficult to avoid the impression that it was
drawn up purpose of confuting the authority of
for the
St. Athanasius in support of the Latin doctrine of the
Procession as put forward by those documents, which had

been disseminated throughout Western Europe, and alleging
it instead in support of the Eastern doctrine. If so, it
could not have been compiled before the latter part of the
sixteenth century, and might have originated even later.
The title of the Creed in this version is 2i^/,/3oAoz> rrjs
fftcrrecos TOV ayiov 'Adava&Lov 'Apx^TTio-KOTrou 'A\eav8peLas.
This version of the Athanasian Creed is a recent insertion

in theAppendix Greek Horology, having been placed
to the
there together with some other documents by a former

editor of the Horology, Bartholomaeus Hieromonachus
Cutlumusianus, in the year 1832. Previously it stood

together with them at the commencement of the book,
without however forming part of the devotional offices.
This is clearly shown by Cutlumusianus's preface, which is
reprinted in his edition of 1868, a copy of which I have

before me, taken in connexion with a letter addressed by
him to the highest authority in the Eastern Church, Con-
stantius, Patriarch of Constantinople, and the reply of the
latter, which are both immediately subjoined. In the

letter, which is dated December 16, 1831, the editor de-
scribes himself as 'a true son of the Greek Church of

Christ,' states the nature of the work which he had en-
gaged in, explains his
literary difficulties, and ends by
expressing the hope that his Holiness will grant him

a favourable hearing and return a clear answer with prac-
tical direction. The
Patriarch in his reply, dated March 14,
1832, vouchsafes a favourable reception to the filial judicious

letter addressed to him. Therewith he enclosed a list of
corrections of the Horology from an ancient trustworthy
manuscript preserved at Constantinople in this Cutlumu-
:
sianus would find the answer to his inquiries, and in accord-

ance with this he is enjoined to emend his proposed edition.
Hence at the conclusion of his preface the latter refers to
the Patriarch's reply as his ecclesiastical authority for the
alterations made by him in the book.
Cutlumusianus's edition of the Horology of 1868 was,
I believe, the last produced by him. Since his death the
Phoenix press at Venice, from which his book issued, has
published several revised editions of it, one of which I have
seen that dated 1884. Therein our version of the Atha-
nasian Creed occupies the same position as in the 1868
and previous editions in the Appendix, coming after the
Gospel for Easter Day, which is the same as our Gospel
for Christmas Day, St. John i. 1-14. The new editor in
his preface expressly refers to Cutlumusianus's Horology
as 'being sanctioned by the great Church of Christ to
which we belong,' alleging in proof his letter to the
Patriarch and the Patriarch's reply. He had revised it
by collation with a copy of the Horology published in

Constantinople by the honoured Seitanides in accordance
with the judgement of the central administrative Council,
v.] Versions. 303
and with the approval and sanction of the great Church

'
of Christ.'
The late Dr. Swainson regarded these Horologies pub-
lished at Venice as 'simply the speculations of different
l
booksellers/ devoid of all ecclesiastical sanction . I think
I have shown that they possess the highest ecclesiastical

authority within the domain of the Eastern Church.
Eastern Church books seem always to have been printed
at Venice.
It has been mentioned that our version of the Athanasian
Creed was transferred together with other documents from
the commencement of the Greek Horology to an Appendix
at the end in 1832. The precise date when it was admitted
to the book I am unable to state ;
but it would not have
been earlier than the latter half of the eighteenth century.
I have seen in the Bodleian Library Horologies printed

respectively in the years 1535, 1545, 1563, 1601, 1602, 1631,
1633, all at Venice. In none of them is the Athanasian
Creed to be found. In these, with one exception, the
Hour Offices are preceded by the Gospel for Easter Day,
viz. St. John 1-14, and the Passion from St. John's Gospel,
or rather the four last chapters of These two docuit.
ments are absent from the 1601 book, which seems to be

an abridged Horology. Dr. Swainson mentions several
Horologies, which he had examined at Venice and in the

British Museum, ranging in date from 1533 to 1870 2 .
The earliest in which he found the Athanasian Creed was

printed in 1787, where itcomes, he says, immediately after
the Gospel for Easter Day and before the Hour Offices.
But it does not follow that it was then introduced as he
concludes to the Horology, as an edition was published in
1
The Nicene and Apostolic Creeds, p. 476.
a
u. s.
pp. 477, 478.
1777 which he did not see, and possibly others also between
1787 and 1758, the date of the next in priority of time,
which he did see. A copy of the 1758 book may be seen
in the British Museum. Our document is not there but ;
it appears at the commencement of the Horology printed

in 1800 the next Greek Horology in point of date which
the Museum possesses distinct however from the Hour
Offices subjoined to it is the note already mentioned
: :
the Gospel for Easter Day and the closing chapters of

St. John's Gospel are relegated to the end of the book.
The necessary conclusion is that the Athanasian Creed
could not have been inserted in the Greek Horology until
after the year 1
758. Probably, I think, it was first admitted
to it in the edition of 1777.
2. Next after the Greek versions those in our own lan-
guage clearly call for notice.

It has been already mentioned that in Psalters written in
England in the tenth and eleventh centuries an interlinear
gloss or version in Anglo-Saxon is found annexed to the

Athanasian Creed, as well as to the Psalter itself and
Canticles. And the true nature of these glosses was pointed
out that they are not strictly translations, the Anglo-
Saxon words being inserted severally above their Latin
equivalents, but without their proper inflexional endings,

and in accordance with the order of the Latin words, so
1
that they are not formed into sentences .
The earliest English version of the Creed, extant or

known to be extant, is preserved in the Bodleian MS. 425 2 ,
3
and was edited by Hickes in his Thesaurus . The portion
relating to the Incarnation has been recently re-edited from
Hickes's text in Mr. Oliphant's work on Old and Middle
1 2 3
See above, chap. iii.
19. F. 69. v. Vol. i.
p. 233.
V,
] Versions. 305
English
1
. The about A.D. 1240,
latter dates the version
and describes '

it as most likely written in the Northern-
most part of Lincolnshire, perhaps not far from Hull.' This

version, being composed in metre and rhyme, and variations
being necessarily introduced to suit the exigencies of the

metre and rhyme, is not a verbal or exact representation
of the original. Some idea of it may be formed from its
rendering of the last verse :
'
That is the traulh (i. e. Truth or Faith) that heli (i. e. holy) isse,
"Whilk Lot unless) ilkon with
(i. e. miht hisse
Trevvlic and fastlic trovve he
Saufe ne mai he never be.'
The next English version in point of time occurs in

a British Museum MS. press-mark Addit. 17376 con-
taining a Psalter with Canticles in Latin and English,
followed by some poems or metrical pieces in English.
The Athanasian Creed with its version, which like that of
the Psalter and Canticles is in prose, is found in its usual
place at the end of the Canticles. The first of the sub-

'
joined de septem sacramentis,' and it has the

poems is
following colophon at the end: 'Oretis pro anima domini

Willelmi de Schorham quondam Vicarii de Chart iuxta
Ledes, Qui composuit istam compilationem de septem
sacramentis.' The second is a rhyming version of some
portion of the ritual of the Sacraments. The third is
on the ten commandments, de decem preceptis/ and c
the fourth on the seven mortal sins. The latter has the
following notablecolophon: 'Oretis pro anima domini
Willelmi de Schorham quondam Vicarii de Chart iuxta
Ledes qui composuit istam compilationem de septem
mortalibus peccatis. Et omnibus dicentibus orationem
dominicam cum salutacione angelica xl a dies venie a
1
p- 3 02 -
X
domino Symone Archiepiscopo Cantuarie conceduntur.'

The fifth is 'on the joys of the Virgin,' and has the
colophon, Oretis pro anima Willelmi de Schorham quon-
'
dam vicarii de Chart iuxta Ledes.' The sixth is a trans-

lation of Robert Grosseteyte's hymn to the Blessed Virgin.
commences Marye mayde mylde and fre/ and is
'
It
followed by the
colophon,
'
Oretis pro anima domini
Roberti Grosseteyte quondam episcopi Lincolniensis.' The
seventh and last relates to some of the mysteries of the
Faith, particularly the Deity, the Creation, and the Fall of
man. It has no colophon. All these pieces were edited
from this MS. Percy Society in 1849 by Mr. Thomas
for the
Wright, as the poems of William de Schorham, who was

so called probably as a native of Schorham, near Otford,
in Kent, and is believed to have been instituted to the
vicarage of Chart Sutton immediately after its appro-

priation to the Augustinian Priory at Ledes in 1320.
Mr. Wright infers from the circumstance of some of these
poems being attributed by the colophons to William of
Schorham that they were all his work, and he assigns
their composition to the reign of Edward II. With regard
to the English version of the Psalter, including of course
that of the Creed the point which concerns ourselves it
has been hitherto also ascribed to Schorham's authorship,
upon the grounds that the whole of the MS. is written in

one hand, a hand of the earlier half of the fourteenth
century, and that two of the poetical pieces subjoined to
the Psalter are expressly attributed to him, also that in
places in the book the prayers of the faithful are requested

1
for his soul's welfare . But the argument is clearly in-
conclusive. Even if all the pieces which are annexed to
1
See The Holy Bible in the earliest English Versions by John Wydiffe,
edited by Forshall and Madden, vol. i. Preface, p. iv.
v.] Versions. 307
the Psalter were ascribed colophons to William de

by their
Schorham instead of two only, as we see to be the case, it
would not follow that the translation of the Psalter was
also due to his authorship. And
the requests in three
if
of the colophons for intercessions for his soul there are

no other like requests on his behalf, I believe, contained in
the book are
any proof of his authorship of the trans-
lation, then for a similar reason it might be attributed to
Robert Grosseteyte, for whose soul, it will be observed,
the fourth colophon above quoted solicits the prayers of
the faithful. But this is not all. German scholar, A
Dr. M. Konrath, asserts that the version of the Psalms,
including necessarily that of the Canticles and Creed, must

needs be wrongly attributed to William of Schorham.
inasmuch as not Kentish, but belongs to a Midland
it is
1
dialect . Thus nothing is known respecting the author-
ship of this version of the Athanasian Creed. Still it is
a document of so much interest and importance in reference

to the history of the Qtiicuuque in our own Church and
country that I have deemed it desirable, especially as it

has never yet I believe been printed, to produce it in the
z
Appendix The date of its construction may be inferred
.
approximately from the second colophon quoted above,

which makes mention of an indulgence granted by Symon
Mepeham, Archbishop of Canterbury, and that too ap-
parently as a contemporaneous incident, showing that the

MS. could not have been written before the commencement
of his archiepiscopate in 132$, and probably was not
1 of William de Schorham, 'befinden sich in einem

'Sie,'i. e. the poems
bancle mit einer Psalmentibersetzung, die man bisher falselich demselbem
verfasser zugescrieben hat ; sie ist jedoch nicht Kentish, sondern gehort einem
mittellandischem dialecte an.' Beitrage zur Erkliirung und Textcritik des
William von Schorham, von Dr. M. Konrath. Berlin, 1878.
2
Appendix M.
X a
written after termination in 1333.

its The version there-
fore may be assigned to quite the commencement of
Edward Ill's reign.
In the opinion of Dr. Konrath the conjecture of

Mr. Wright that Schorham collected his poems and in-
serted them in this manuscript is erroneous. And certainly

it would appear obvious from the colophons soliciting
prayers for his soul that he could have had nothing to do
with the compilation of the book, as they clearly imply
that he was dead at the time. Besides, Dr. Konrath
concludes upon internal critical grounds that the scribe
by whom it was written was not a Kentish man though
a Southerner.
Immediately Athanasian Creed, f. 149 v., some

after the
memoranda, now almost obliterated, have been inserted in

an old hand, but not the same which appears in the rest of
the book. Of these the following, which I was able to
trace, though with difficulty; would seem to indicate that

it was once the property of a Franciscan community :
'Anno domini MCCxx mo viri bartholomei fratres minores

primo venerunt in angliam.
Anno domini MCC mo XXIIII fuit regula beati francisci
consummata.
Anno domini MCC m XX vl obiit beatus Franciscus.'
If the rest were deciphered, possibly they might supply

a nearer clue to the original home and even the birth-
place of this interesting volume. It is a book not unlikely

to have emanated from Franciscans.
The next old English version in point of date is that
previously mentioned as the work of Wyclif or one of his

]
followers, produced towards the close of the fourteenth
century. It was edited by Mr. Arnold from the Bodleian

1
Above, ir. 24.
Versions. 309
1
MS. Bodl. 288 by Dr. Swainson from a Cambridge
,
also
2
University Library MS. Ee. i. io the copy which I print
;
inAppendix N is transcribed from the British Museum

MS. Addit. 10046, of the fifteenth century. In this, as in
other MSS., it should be remembered the version does not
appear alone, but in combination withits cognate Com-
mentary, each verse being followed by its appropriate

Exposition. This may account for a certain abruptness,
or inaccuracy of translation, or insertion or omission of
words, which appear occasionally. It will be very interesting

to compare this version with the preceding one attributed
to William de Schorham. In particular it may be noticed
'
that while the latter has in verse i the catholick faith,' in
'
verse 19 catholik religion,' and in the last verse '
the
bileve catholik,' the former has in verse i
'
the comyne
bileve,' in verse 3 likewise 'the comune bileve,' in verse 19
general religioun,' and in the last verse general bileve.'

' '
It will be seen by-and-by that in these renderings the
Wycliffite version followed earlier French versions, which

were used in England.
No other English version, so far as we know, appeared
until the year 1539, when Bishop Hilsey's Manual of
Prayers or Primer was issued, as we may say, under royal

authority. Our Creed in English, entitled
'
The Symbole
or Crede of the great doctour Athanasius dayly red in the
Church,' stands at the commencement of this Manual,

following immediately the Prologue, and it is followed
immediately by the Apostles' Creed, also in English. The

title of the book, as stated by Dr. Burton, is 'The Manual
of Prayers or the Primer in English set out at length ... set

forth by John, late Bishop of Rochester, at the command-
1
Select English Works ofJohn Wyclif, vol. iii.
a
Nicene and Apostles' Creeds, p. 488.
3io Documentary Evidence. [CH.
ment of the right honourable Lord Thomas Crumwell,

Lord Privy Seal, Vicegerent of the King's Highness V It
should be mentioned that in 'the King's Primer,' published
in 1545 and reprinted in the following year and sub-
sequently, the Athanasian Creed is not found only the

Apostles'.
Another version was published, probably a few years
after that of Bishop Hilsey, at the end of a Psalter in
'
English, truly translated out of the Latin,' together with

versions of the Benedicite, Magnificat, Benedictus, Nunc
dimittis, and Te Deum. This was reprinted recently by
2
Dr. Swainson ,
who dates it about the year 1542, but
the precise year when
was issued does not appear to be
it
known for has evidently a close connexion

certain. It
with Hilsey's version, the title being the same and the text
the same with a few variations.
In 1549 in the first Prayer Book of Edward the Sixth,
where it was printed immediately after the Third Collect
for Evensong, appeared the version, which especially claims

our attention and commands our interest, inasmuch as,
saving the interval of Queen Mary's reign, it has been ever
since used in the services of the Church of England, and is
so used at the present day with a few variations, only one
of which any importance. Though we may not be
is of
able to trace the author with certainty, we cannot refrain
from endeavouring to ascertain the sources from which it
was drawn. The results of such an investigation will be
found to be curious.
have previously drawn attention to a Greek version
I
of the Creed, which was first edited by Aldus at Venice in
1
Three Primers put forth in th: reign of Henry VIII, edited y Dr.
Kdward Burton, 1834.
a
Nicene and Apostles' Creed, p. 490.
Versions. 311
1497 in a small book of Hours, and afterwards reproduced

in not fewer than eight editions of the same book printed
at various places Venice, Tubingen, Hagenau, Florence,

and Paris from 1505 to 1543 inclusive,
at dates ranging
which was also reproduced at the end of a Greek Psalter
printed at Strasburg in 1524, and again at Antwerp in
1533. From the fact of the appearance of the version in
these numerous editions of two different books which were
and the early
published at the close of the fifteenth century
part of the sixteenth ending with the year 1543, and which
are certified to us by copies now extant in our libraries
other editions of the same books there may have been and
it is not unlikely there were it is. obvious that it must
have been well known to scholars throughout Western
Europe towards the close of the first half of the latter
century, probably better known than any other Greek
version of the Creed, by some possibly regarded as the
most authentic representation, of the original text. Could
itthen have been unknown to the divines, with the Arch-
bishop of Canterbury at their head, who in the year 1548

were engaged in compiling the first book of Common
Prayer of Edward the Sixth? This would appear a priori
very improbable. Literary intercommunion between Eng-
land and the Continent was not an unknown or rare
occurrence at the epoch we are referring to. Foreign
scholars visited our country and brought back books with
them, and English scholars went abroad in quest of literary

treasures. However this be, certain it is that the author
of the Prayer-Book version of the Athanasian Creed had
before him a copy in some edition or other of Aldus's
Greek version, for some phrases and words are evidently
translated from it and not from the Latin. In proof of
this let me refer to the subjoined table, in which are placed
for the purpose of comparison several words or phrases

of our English version of 1549, and side by side the
corresponding words or phrases of the Latin text of

the Qiiicunque^ which must have been most familiar to the
compiler that namely of the Sarum Breviary and also

of the Greek text of Aldus. The text of the Quicunque
I have quoted from is that of Procter and Wordsworth's
edition of the Sarum Breviary. The text of Aldus may
be seen, as already intimated, in Appendix K reproduced
from the Bodleian copy of 1497.
Latin of Sarum
English version, 1549. Greek of Aldus,
Breviary.
' '
(1) and the Holy Ghost,' 'et' omitted in all be- /cat inserted in all
' '
verses 8, 9, 10, 13, fore Spiritus Sanc- before rti trvevpa TO
15, and 17. tus.' ajiov.'
(2) 'incomprehensible,' 'immensus.'

verses 9 and 12.
(3) 'not non nee

'
three incompre- tres increati i>8 rpeis
hensibles nor three tres immensi.' ovSe rpeis
uncreated/ ver. 12.

' '
(4) 'believe rightly/ ver. 29. fideliter credat.' opOuis mffTtvffy.'

' '
(5) 'for the right faith is,' est ergo fides recta.' earl yap iriaris 6p6rj.'
ver. 30.
(6) 'God . . and man/ '

Deus est ... et homo '
Qcos . .. KOI avOpca-
ver. 31. est.' TTOS.'
(7) 'perfect God and per-

'
perfectus Deus per- Oeos ical re\eios
fect man,' ver. 32. fectus homo.'
(8) 'except a man believe '

nisi quisque fideliter
'
eav /J.T]
TIS TTicrrcys mff-
faithfully,' ver. 42. firmiterque crediderit."
Inthese eight instances the English clearly follows

all
the Greek and not the Latin, though the fifth and sixth
and seventh would be insignificant apart from the other
more With regard to the second and
striking examples.
third some remarks are necessary. There can be little
doubt that the word incomprehensible was suggested to the
translator by the Greek aKaraArjTrros, but was understood
by him and should be understood by us to mean, not that

which is incapable of being grasped by the intellect, but
V ] Versions. 313
that which cannot be contained within the limits of space.

In this sense the word was received and used in the
sixteenth century, as for instance by Hooker very distinctly :
'
That presence everywhere is the sequel of an infinite and
incomprehensible substance, for what can be everywhere but

that which can nowhere be comprehended l ? At the '
same time, while the word was chosen by the translator as

the most literal and exact interpretation of d/caraA?/7rros,
it would appear probable that it also commended itself
to his mind as embracing and representing the various
renderings of the Latin in previous English versions the
'mychel' of that attributed to Schorham, the Wycliffite

' '
'
without mesure myche,' the immesurate of Hilsey, and
the 'without mesure' of the version which followed Hilsey's.
And no doubt he was right in his interpretation. For that
the compiler of the Greek version first printed by Aldus
understood not to mean that which is incon-
d/ccrra AT? 777-05
ceivable to the human mind, but that which cannot be

comprehended in space, is proved by this, that in other
Greek versions, where some other word is used in the place
of this, in every case the word so used has this or an
equivalent meaning. Thus the first of Montfaucon has

a/merpos, immeasurable, his second aTretpo?, infinite, the second
of Caspari, while it has aKaraArjTrro? in verse 9, has do/no-ros,
illimitable, in verse i z, the two being clearly used as con-

vertible terms, and the fourth of Montfaucon has Ttavro-
2
KpaTtop, which, as Bishop Pearson points out, has been
understood to signify that God enholdeth, encircleth and
'
containeth all things.' And in the above sense dKaTaAr)7rros

was used by divines, for instance St. John of Damascus :
1
book v. chap. Iv. 4.
Ecclesiastical Polity,
2
Exposition of the Creed, Art. I, with note upon the word, and another note
in Art. VI. Edition 1832, pp. 70, 429.
"Airtipov TO dslov KOL aK.ara\t]Tirov, KOI TOVTO povov

KCLTaXyTTTov f) aTTeipta KCU aKaTa\rj^f[a
1
. The misunder-
standing of the word incomprehensible in our version,
I may remark by the way, has been and is a fertile source
of objections and difficulties. With regard to the third

instance in the above table not three incomprehensibles nor
three uncreated the order of the words here, it may be
observed, is inconsistent with the rest of the verse, but one
uncreated and one incomprehensible, and it is peculiar. It
is not found in the Latin, nor in any earlier English
version, nor in any Greek version, except the third of

Montfaucon ;
nor yet in every text of that, for it is not in
Genebrard's edition of the MS. of Baiffius nor in the

Florence MS. as printed by Dr. Swainson. It is found
only in Aldus's text and in Bryling and Stephens's copy,
which, it must be recollected, is known to us in the present
day only from Genebrard's collations of it as
compared
with his own text. From one of these two therefore the
translator must have derived this peculiar reading, in all
probability from some edition of Aldus's text. In regard

to the fourth and the last instances noted above their
conformity with the Greek of Aldus is the more remark-

able, as in them, no less than in the last-mentioned instance,
earlier English versions clearly followed the Latin.
Thus in some passages the translator obviously followed
this Greek version in preference to the Latin text of the
Quicimque. But we cannot conclude from thence with the
2
late Dr. Swainson that he did so throughout. On the
contrary, it will be seen in the subjoined instances that
the very reverse was the case, the Latin being followed,
not the Greek :
1
De Fide Orthodoxa, lib. i. cap. iv.
2
Nicene and Apostles' Creeds, p. 495.
V. Versions.
English version of 15 Latin ofSarum Breviaiy. Greek of Aldus.

' '
'and yet,' verses 11, 14, et tamen.' TT\TIV:
16, 18.
' '
by him-
'
every person sigillatim unamquam- IS'iav fuav iicaarov iiiro-
self/ ver. ig. que personam.' ffraaiv.'

' '
not made, nor created,' non factus, nee creatus.' '
OV TTOITfrOS, OV KTlffTOS.'
ver. 22.
'
neither made, nor cre-
'
non factus, nee creatus, ov iroirjrov, ov icriffrov,
ated, nor begotten, but nee genitus, sed pro- dAA'
proceeding,' ver. 23. ceclens.'

' ' '
the whole three persons totae tres personae co- ffSiai at rpeTs vtroarafftis
are coeternal together aeternae sibi sunt et ical ffwaiSicu dfflv laf-
and coequal,' ver. 26. co-aequales.' rafy ai iaai.'
' ' '
so that in all things, as ita tit
per omnia, sicut uffre Karci wai/ra, icaOws
1
it is aforesaid,' ver. 27. iam supra dictum est.
1 ' '
the Unity in Trinity and et Unitas in Trinitate ical TT)V yUovaSa ev rptaSi
the Trinity in Unity is et Trinitas in Unitate <Tf@eff9ai Sfi ical r^v
to be worshipped/ ver. veneranda sit.' Tpiada ev
27.
' '
although/ ver. 34. licet.'
so God and man,' ver.

' '
ita Deus et homo.' '
o'vrca KOI o OeavOptuiros'
37-
' '
descended into hell/ ver. descendit ad inferos.' tv a5ou.'
38.
Two cases occur where the Latin is clearly not followed,

but where it is doubtful whether the Greek is followed or
some English text or texts.
earlier First, in verse 20 the
'
English has three Gods '
or three Lords/ the Latin tres Deos
aut Dominos/ the Greek of Aldus rpels Ofovs ?} rpei? Kvpiovs.
Here the Greek as contrasted with the Latin is apparently
followed, but considering that three is found before Lords

preceding English versions, it is a fair question
in all four
whether the translator was not influenced by them in his

insertion of three. Secondly, in verse 39 'the right hand
'
of the Father God Almighty is very remarkable, the Latin
being
'
dexteram Dei Patris omnipotentis! The Greek has
8eft<Sy TOV Trarpos /cat Qtov TtavTOKparopos, which at first sight
it might appear that the translator followed. But it will be

observed that he has not followed it exactly, for he omitted
316 Dociimentary Evidence. [CH.
the copula, and still more, the words in the same order in
'
which they are here used '

the Father God Almighty
and in the same connexion are found in two English
versions of the Apostles' Creed, one preserved in a MS. of
the thirteenth century, and the other in a MS. of the
fifteenth, which have respectively 'sit on his Fadir richt
honde, God almichti,' and Fadre righte
'
sitteth on his side,
God alle mygte V The translator therefore may have
been probably was guided by these English documents.
We have seen that in several instances our version of
1549 followed the Greek of Aldus. In one it appears to
have been modelled in accordance with another Greek
version, viz. in verse 25? where it has '
none is afore nor
after other, none
greater nor lesse then other.' This is
is
'
distinctly different both from the Latin, which has nihil
prius aut posterns, nihil maius aut minus,' and from the
Aldine text, which has similarly ovbev -rrporepoy rj vo-rtpov,
ovbev peZCov 17 e'AarrozJ. It is more like the first version of
Caspari, which has ovbels o Trpwros ?}

6 ea-âros, ovbels 6 /jei'cov
i?
But here again the translator may possibly
6 eAarrcoi/.
have taken a hint from earlier English versions Hilsey's

and that which was published shortly after his which have
'
none before or after another, nothing more nor lesse.'
A few other cases may be noted where the translation

appears to have been influenced by previous versions. In
verse 2, the version of 1549 had not 'whole and undefiled,'
'
'
but 'holy or holi and undefiled.' It is impossible to help
suspecting that the latter word was derived from the

Wycliffite version and that attributed to William de
' ' '
Schorham, which have respectively unfilid and nought
defouled.' In regard to holy, it is inconceivable that the
translator could have thus rendered integram.' The word
'
1
Heurtley, Harmonia Symbolica, pp. 95 and 99.
v.] Versions. 317
which would seem most likely to have suggested itself to

his mind as the most fit rendering is that which is now
in the Prayer Book, whole, i. e. the faith in its integrity,
without addition or diminution, or, according to the spelling
of the epoch, hole. This was the rendering of the two
versions just named, Schorham's so and the Wycliffite
called
'
version, the former having

'
hole and the latter hool.' '
If the translator chose one of the above epithets from these
sources, as we see that he probably did, he would probably

in like manner choose the other from them. This was also
the rendering of integram in the version which was brought
out soon after Hilsey's, and but shortly before the first
Prayer Book of Edward the Sixth. Thus we might expect

that the author of the version of 1549, following previous
English versions, would adopt the word hole in verse 2, as

the translation of integram, and the change from that to
holi or holy by a copyist's or printer's error would be very
easy.
Again, the translator seems to have been influenced by
the Wycliffite and Schorham versions in his rendering of
verse 7, 'Such as the Father,' &c. Notably of in verse 21
of none,' and in verse 23 of the Father,' and in verse 23

' '
'
of the Father and the Son,' appears to be drawn from the
same sources. Hilsey's version, and that before mentioned
as following his, have of in verse 21, but from in the two
others. Furtliermore in verse 29 is found in Hilsey alone ;
the Wycliffite version has Biside. The concluding words

'he cannot be saved' also, which differ alike from the
Latin,
'
salvus esse non poterit,' and the Greek of Aldus,
cr<o6r]i>ai ov 8w?/<rercu, follow Hilsey the Wycliffite and
;
Schorham versions have respectively he may not here be '
'
saaf and here may not be sauf.'

'
In the word must in verse 28 'must thus think of the

Trinity' may be noted a verbal departure, which does

not materially affect the meaning, from every preceding
version.
The obvious conclusion from all this is that the transla-
tion of 549s which in substance we still use in our Prayer
1
Book, was not drawn uniformly from any one text of the
Creed existing at the time, but was probably compiled
from several different sources, the two principal ones being
the Latin text as then used in the Church service, and the
third Greek version of Montfaucon according to the text
first printed by Aldus in 1497. In some particulars, among
them a few very remarkable ones, Aldus's text is evidently
followed ;
in others the Latin is adhered to no less dis-
tinctly ;
in others again it seems to have been influenced
by previous English versions, in one by the first Greek
version of Caspar!, and in one the translator chose a word
not literally corresponding with his authorities, but ex-
pressing their meaning. As to the greater portion of the

document, which agrees alike with the Aldine text and
it is impossible to say that one was followed to the
the Latin,
exclusion of the other but if one only was followed, we
;
should naturally suppose it to have been the Latin, with

which the translator must have been most conversant.
It is very remarkable that the translator in constructing
a version to be authoritatively used in the Church of
England should have deferred so much to a Greek version

as to accept some of its readings in preference to those of
the Latin text of the Creed as recited up to that time in
the service of the Church and it is still more remarkable
;
that the bishops and divines who compiled the first Prayer
Book ofEdward should have endorsed these departures
from what was then the received text, if we may so de-
scribe it. The position is not to be accounted for by the
Versions. 319
hypothesis that one or both of these parties if indeed they

were distinct parties, it being very possible, we may say
probable, that the translator was himself one of the com-
pilers, indeed the chief of their body, Archbishop Cranmer
regarded the Greek Aldus text as the authentic veritable
text of St. Athanasius. If this had been the belief of the
translator, he would have adhered more closely than he has

done to that text. Had it been the belief of the compilers,
it seems strange that they should have dropped the title
of the Creed which appears in all editions of Aldus's text,
SvfjifioXov TOV a-yiov 'AOavaaiov, and the corresponding one

f
in the Breviary, Symbolum Athanasii/ and described it
instead in the rubric of the new book simply as

'
this
Confession of our Christian fayth 1 .'

The text of the Prayer Book version has undergone but
little alteration. The only alteration of any importance
which has taken place is that of holy in verse 2 into
whole, made in 1627. Are they in verse 14 was changed
1
Two schemes for a new Office drawn up by Cranmer have been edited
recently for the first time from the British Museum MS. Reg. 7- B. iv. See
Edward VI and the Book of Common Prayer, by Francis Aidan Gasquet and
Edmund Bishop, Appendix i, ii, iii. In the first, a scheme for a Breviary,
inspired by Quignon's reformed Breviary and assigned to some date between
1543 and Henry the Eighth's death in January 1547, the Athanasian Creed is
entitled 'symbolum Athanasii Quicunque milt' in the second, a scheme for
;
Morning and Evening Prayer assigned to an early period in the reign of

Edward and consequently, assuming this date to be correct, drawn up very
shortly before the first Prayer Book, which could not have been compiled later
than the autumn of 1548, inasmuch as the Act of Uniformity, which legalized it,
was passed on the aist of January, 1549, Parliament having assembled in the
'
previous November, it is entitled symbolum Quicunque mtlf.' The difference
in the title of the Creed in the later Office as compared with that in the earlier
may fairly considered significant and illustrative of the title adopted in the
be
firstPrayer Book. The dates assigned to these two schemes drawn up by
Cranmer are, it should be mentioned, conjectural on the part of the editors, but
based upon probable grounds. I must add that the title of the Creed in the
1549 book, though stated by the late Dr. Swainson to be Greek in its origin
Nicene and Afostlei Creeds, p. 493 is not to be found in any Greek version.
'
into they are in J552, and a similar change in verse 16

was made in 1589. In verse 25 nor after was changed
into or after in 1553, nor lesse into or less in 1589, and
other into another in 1552. In verse 27, as it is was
changed into as is in 1552. In verse 29, believe rightly in
the Incarnation was changed into believe rightly the Incarna-
tion in 1662. In verse 39, the was inserted before dead in
1552. And
in verse 40, of theyr own was changed into
for their own in 1552.

3. The German versions, on account of their antiquity,
may most fittingly be noticed next.
The earliest was first edited by Eccard from a Wolfen-
biittel MS., Theol. xxvii. f.
153, as part of a manual
of religious instruction and devotion entitled Catechesis
Theotisca 1 The manuscript appears to have belonged
.
originally to the Benedictine abbey of Weissenburg, from

a note upon the first leaf: Codex monasterii Petri et Pauli
'
in Wissenburg.' From the character of the handwriting

Eccard considers it to have been written about the middle
of the ninth century. The style also of the language em-
ployed would point to that as the epoch which produced
the book. Hence he is of opinion that the Catechesis may
have been drawn up on occasion of the Second Council of
Maintz held A. D. 847. He describes the compiler as
'
monachus Weissenburgensis sive Otfridus fuerit sive alius.'
It is certainly a book of great interest for the insight it
affords into the substance and character of the religious
teaching of the German Church in the ninth century. It

contains the Lord's Prayer, a list of Peccata criminalia, the
Apostles' Creed, the Athanasian, the Gloria in Excelsis,
1
Jncerti monachi }Viessenburgcnsis Catechesis Theotisca saeculo ix. con-
scripta, nuuc vero primum edita ... in unum collegit . . . ac praefatione
illustravit J. Georgius Eccardus.
. . . Hanov. 1713.
v.] Versions. 321
each being accompanied with a translation in the vernacular.

The Athanasian Creed is followed by the words Explicit '
Fides Catholica.' This version has been printed recently

from the Wolfenbiittel MS. in Massmann's Die deutschen
Abschwonmgs-, Glaubens-, Beicht- und Betformelu vom
achten bis zum zwolften Jahrhundert> pp. 40 and 88.
The next in date was by Notker Balbulus, a monk of
St. Gall, to whose paraphrase of the Psalms it is subjoined.
As he died in 912,, it may clearly be assigned to the close
of the ninth century or the commencement of the tenth.
It has -no title. It was first edited by Eccard from the
Vienna MS. D. T. 79, f.
229 in the Appendix to his work
De rebus Franciae Orientalis et Episcopatus VVirceburgensis,
torn. ii.
p. 932. It is also printed by Massmann from the
same MS. in the work above mentioned, side by side with

the previous version. In some cases Notker adds to his
translation a comment or paraphrase.
Athird version, later than the two just mentioned but
not later than the twelfth century, is edited by Massmann
from two Munich MSS., germ. 589, f. 153, and germ. 588.
In the latter appears the title Psalmus Quicunque vult
'
salvus esse!
German versions are contained also in two German
Psalters in the Vienna Imperial Library, the first assigned
to the fifteenth century and numbered xxxvill in Denis's
Codices manuscripti theologici Bibliothecae Palatinae Vindo-
bonensis, vol. i. The Creed follows the Canticles, and is
imperfect, owing no doubt to the mutilation of the MS.,

ending with the words of verse 28, Daz ist eyn war
{
gloube, daz wir glouben und bekennen daz unse herre sy

gotes.' Denis states that the version of the Psalms in this
book is much earlier than the fifteenth century, and prob-

ably this is true also of the version of the Quicunque. The
Y
second is numbered XXXIX in the same volume of Denis,

and is also assigned to the fifteenth century. The Creed
follows the Canticles and Te Deum, and is followed by
Litanies.German versions are also found in two Latin
and German Psalters in the same library, the first numbered
LVII in the second volume of Denis's Catalogue, and as-
signed to the thirteenth century. The Creed follows the

Canticles and the Te Deum, and is followed by Litanies, in
which many German saints are invoked. In the second,
numbered LVIII in the same volume and assigned likewise
to the thirteenth century, our document, with the Lord's
Prayer and Apostles' Creed, follows the Canticles. This

MS., before it passed into the Vienna Library, belonged
to the Jesuit College at Gratz in Styria, and was probably
executed either in that country or Carinthia.
These no doubt are but a few among many instances of
manuscript German versions of the Athanasian Creed which
are even now extant in various libraries.
4. Let us pass to French versions. In reference to these
we may fittingly revert to the first of the Capitula of
Hincmar delivered to
presbyters, already noticed
his l
,
that every presbyter should commit to memory the dis-

'
course of Athanasius concerning the Faith, commencing

Whosoever will be saved, and understand its meaning and
be able to enunciate it in common words,' i.e. the verna-
cular. Clearly the practice thus enjoined upon the clergy
of interpreting the Athanasian Creed in the vernacular to
their people would necessarily lead to the construction of
versions. A priest who had thus interpreted it would
naturally go on for his own convenience as well as the
benefit of others to put his translation into writing. Nor
is there any reason to consider this Capitulum of Hincmar
1
Above, Part I.
chap. ii. 8.
V, Versions.
] 323
an isolated enactment of its kind rather it may probably :
be regarded as a sample of similar directions addressed to

the clergy by bishops, at least in France and Germany,
during the ninth century. In Regino's collection of Visita-

tion Articles, so to speak, compiled at the beginning of the
tenth century, but, as is expressly stated, from earlier
authorities, one of the articles of episcopal inquiry is drawn

imitatis mutandis in the words of this Capitulum
1
. And
the collection in the judgement of Baluze represents in sub-
stance the code of disciplinary regulations which had been
in use from the time of Boniface, or nearly so.
This Capitulum then of Hincmar clearly points to the

probability that in France, as well as in Germany, versions
of the Athanasian Creed originated in the ninth century.
The earliest manuscript copy of any French version known
of at present probably there are some earlier copies ex-
tant, although not yet brought to light is the first of the
two mentioned by Montfaucon and printed in his Diatribe.
He dates it about the year uoo; and as he found it in a
Colbert MS., there can be little or no doubt that it may be
found now
the Bibliotheque Nationale at Paris, to which
in
the Colbert collection passed 2 It has no title. The three .
'
verses at the beginning are as follows :
Kikunques vult
salf estre devant totes choses bosoing est qu'il tienget la
comune Laquelle si cascun entiere e neant malmise ne
fei.
guarderat, sanz dotance pardurablement perirat. Iceste est

a certes la comune fei, qu'un deu en trinitet e la trinitet en
'
unitet aorums.' It will be noticed that '
Fides Catholica
is both times rendered
'
la commune fei.' Similarly in
verse 19 we have 'la comune religiun.' The text is im-
1
Above, I. ii. 10.
2 '
Ex cod. Colbert. 3133 a 600 annis conscripta est.' Diatribe in Symbolum
Quicunque.
Y 2
'
ending with the words of verse 29, en siecle noz.'

perfect,
Montfaucon's second version is stated by him to be from
a MS. 400 years old, written, that is, about the year
1300, which belonged to the Friars Minor, presumably of
Paris, but he omits to say to what Franciscan house it
belonged. It appears to have been written by the side of
the Latin original, and in both cases the title is peculiar
and remarkable, that of the original being '
Canticum
Bonifacii,' Ce chant fut a Anastaise
that of the version
'
qui apostoiles de Rome.' The French title is explained

by the contemporaneous teaching of Simon Torracensis in
his Commentary on the Creed, viz. that it was drawn up
by Pope Anastasius in a Council at Rome

1
This version .
is distinctly different from the former, and the product of
a later epoch, the translation being more free, indeed para-
phrastic,and the language exhibiting a higher stage of

'
growth and formation. But in this also Catholica is

'
always rendered 'comune'; in verses i, 3, and the last we

have 'la comune foi,' in verse 19
'
la comune religion.'
Another and still later French version, which is worth
noticing, occurs in the British Museum MS.
Harleian 4327.
The book contains a Psalter, followed by the Hours of the
Virgin and other documents, and it is plainly a Lorraine
book. This is shown by the Preface describing the Psalter
'
as dou latin trait et translateit en romans en laingue
lorienne.' Then the Calendar is remarkable for the great

number of French, saints commemorated, including five
bishops of Metz. The date is fixed by a colophon to the
Psalter stating that it was written and translated in the
year 1365. The Psalms, the Canticles both of the Old

and New Testament, the Lord's Prayer, Apostles' Creed,
and Ave Maria are all
'
en romans,' i. e. the Lotharingian
1
Above, I. iv. 18.
V ] Versions. 325
PYench of the period, the initial words only of each docu-

ment appearing in Latin. Then follows the Athanasian
Creed in Latin only, which is remarkable, having for its
'
title
'
Canticum Athanasii epischopi and this concludes ;
what is apparently the first part of the book. The second

part is subjoined after the intervention of one blank leaf.
It comprises the Hours of the Blessed Virgin, the Penitential

Psalms, a Litany, the Vigils of the Dead, followed by
being Orison comune
'
several prayers and collects, the last
pour tons les mors,' and finally the Athanasian Creed pre-
ceded by the rubric Quicunque vult salvus esse Lou credo
'
Athenaise.' All these documents are in the vernacular, and

that only. The compiler of the book I presume omitted
the version of the Quicunque at the end of the Psalter,
because he preferred subjoining it to the Hours, the portion
of the book especially intended for the laity, though indeed
in the Preface the Psalter itself is said to be translated
'
pour les gens laye.' The

Qui- first verse is as follows :
'
conques welt estre sauveiz, il couvient et est besoing et . . .
necessaire tenir et croire fermernent le foy catholike, que

tient et adit saincte eglise.' The last : Vez ci le foy
'
catholique, la queille se chescun ne le croit fermement et
fiaublement, ne porrait estre sauveiz.' It

il will be observed
' * ' ' '
that catholica is here rendered catholike or catholique/

'
not
'
comune as in the former versions. The Hours in
this book seemed to me to be written by the same hand as

the Psalter, the two forming a complete whole.
I cannot leave this part of the subject without drawing
attention to the fact, which is of importance in connexion

with the history of the Athanasian Creed in England,
and must at the same time be a matter of interest to
Englishmen, viz. that French versions of our document
occur in a series of MSS. the survivors, no doubt, of
numerous others of the same class which were written

in England, and were obviously intended to meet the
devotional and religious requirements of the upper classes,
who continued as late as the fourteenth century to speak
the language of their French or Norman ancestors who
had come to our shores with William the Conqueror 1 .
The first instance of these I shall mention is the Eadwine

Psalter deposited at Trinity College, Cambridge, executed
at Canterbury in the reign of Stephen, which has been
previously noticed in connexion with the Stavelot Com-

2
mentary In that book two versions of the Athanasian
.
Creed appear in Saxon and French respectively, written

between the lines of the text, one above the other, the
former clearly being for the Saxon subjugated folk, the
dominant class of Norman descent. The latter
latter for the
commences Ki unques vult salf estre devant tutes choses

:
'
est busuin que il tient.' Here there is a hiatus owing to

the mutilation of the leaf. The next two verses continue :
'
La quele se chascun entiere e nient malmise ne guarderat,
senz dutance perdurablement perirat. Iceste est acertes la
comune fei que un deu en ternite e la ternite en unite
'
iinurum.' In verse 19, Catholica religione" is rendered
'
par comune religion.' The last is ( Ceste est la fei

:
comune, la quele quicunkes fecfeilement e fermement ne

ne purrad"/ There is evidently a close
crerrad, salf estre
resemblance between this and the first version of Mont-
faucon. Next may be mentioned, as belonging also to the
1
The French language was spoken by the superior classes in society in
'
England from the Conquest to the reign of Edward the Third. School-boys . . .
were made to construe their Latin into French. The minutes of the Cor-
. . .
poration of London were in French, as well as the proceedings in Parliament

and in the Courts of Justice. The use of French was much abandoned in the
fourteenth century.' Hallam's Introduction to the Literature of Europe, vol. i.
pp. 63, 64, chap. i.
53.
2
Above, I. iv. 6.
v.] Versions. 327
twelfth century, a British Museum MS., Nero. C. iv, a

Psalter also, but without gloss or
commentary, written in
two columns, the one Latin, the other French. It must
in the monastery of St. Swithun, which
have been written
was attached to the cathedral at Winchester. This is
shown by the great number of English or Saxon saints,
and more particularly bishops of Winchester or Wessex,
mentioned in the Calendar and Litany Cuthbert, Guthlac,
Alfege, Herchenwald, Dunstan, Eadburga, Hedda, Oswald,
Aidan, Birinus, Athelwold, Eadmund, and still more con-
clusively by a prayer to St. Swithun at the end of the
Litany, in which he is thus addressed apparently by
the writer: 'Sancte Swithune tu es cum Christo in socie-
, . .
tate Sanctorum, et ego miser peccator et fragilis peccavi

in atriis tuis in domo tua male vivendo . . . adiuva me
una cum ceteris sanctis quorum corpora in hac iuxta te
requiescunt aula vel quorum reliquie in hac ecclesia vel in
hac civitate continentur,' &c. The date of the book is
assigned to the second half of the twelfth century, but

probably it was not executed later than 1173, the year
of Archbishop Becket's canonization, as his festival on
December 29 does not appear in the Calendar. The
Athanasian Creed occurs in the usual place after the
Canticles, following the Lord's Prayer and Apostles' Creed.
The two initiatory verses of the translation are :
'
Ki que
unkes veolt estre salf, devant tutes choses li est mestier
que il
tienge veire creance. La quele si chascuns entiere
et nient malmise ne guarderat, sanz dutance pardurable-
'
ment perirat.' Verse 3 has also la veire creance/ but in
verse 19 we find 'par commune religiun,' and the last is
'
Icest est la commune fei, la quele si chascun fedeillement
e fermement crerrat (sic], salf estre ne porrat.' There are
two other manuscript Psalters in the British Museum
which contain French versions of the Athanasian Creed,

though evidently written in England and for the use of
English people Harleian 273 of the early part of the
fourteenth century, and Harleian 3770 of the middle of
the same century. The first is written in two columns in
French, the initial words only of the several Psalms and
Canticles being supplied in Latin, but its English origin
appears in the number of English saints commemorated in
the Kalendar and invoked in the Litany, and the flyleaf

contains a memorandum of its possession by an English
owner in the fifteenth century :
'
Iste liber constat lofin
Clerk grocero ap. cario regis Edwardi quarto post con-
questum.' The Quicunque occurs in the usual place in

French only and without any title. In verses I and 3 it
has 'la comune fei,' in verse 19 comune religion,' in the

'
last
'
la comune foi.' From the absence of the petitions at
the end of the Litany, which are usually found in monastic
Psalters, it may be concluded that this book was .not
designed for monastic use. The other Psalter Harleian

1770 had
original its Priory of Austin home in the
Canons at Kirkham in Yorkshire, as we learn from a
memorandum on the flyleaf: '
Liber monasterii de Kirkam.'
It is written in two columns, the one in Latin, the other in
French. The Psalms and Canticles are both without titles.
The Athanasian Creed immediately follows the Te Deum,

which is preceded by the New Testament Canticles. As
'
in the Winchester Psalter, so here (
Catholica fides in
verses i and 3 is In verse 19

translated 'veire creance.'
'
Catholica religione is par comune religiun.' But in the

' '
last we find 'Catholica fides' rendered in a singular manner

' '
by
'
la ferme creance Iceste est la ferme creance, la
quele chascuns que ne la crerrat fermement, ne purrat estre

saufs.' The Lord's Prayer follows the Quictmque, but ends
Versions. 329
abruptly with the words 'panem nostrum.' Thus this

Psalter is imperfect at the end it is also imperfect at ;
the beginning, commencing with the words of the second

Psalm 'fringes eos,' so that at present it has neither
Calendar nor Litany. For my knowledge of the two last-
named MSS. I am indebted to the courtesy of Mr. Scott,
the Keeper of the MSS. in the British Museum. It will
be noticed that the Metz book is the only one of these

MSS. which renders Catholica fides by la catholike or
' ' ' '
' '
la catholique foi,' that two have veire creance,' but the
'
other four comune '

fei with '
comune religion.' This is
a matter of some little interest in connexion with the

Wycliffite version of the Athanasian Creed, tending to
show that the author of that version, which was drawn
up at the time when
the French language was passing
out of use in England and probably with the view of
supplying the place of the French versions previously

in use, derived from them his expressions, 'the comyne
bileve,' 'the comune bileve,' 'general religion,' 'general

bileve V
I may add that an old French metrical version of our
document composed ad usum vulgi ' has been edited by

'
M. Francisque Michel from a Paris MS. of the thirteenth
century Bibl. Nat. Suppl. Franc. No. 5145 together with

the corresponding versions of the Psalter and Canticles to
which it is subjoined z In the same volume is also printed
.
the French version noticed above from the Cotton MS.,

Nero C. iv, together with variants from an old Corbie Psalter,
3
which at one time belonged to the Colbert Collection .
1
See above, I. v. 2 also Appendix N.
;
2
Libri Psalmontm, versio Gallica andqua. Edidit Franciscus Michel,
p. 361.
3
Ibid., p. 255.
In another volume the same editor has printed the French

version of the Quicunque in the Eadwin Psalter, together
with the French versions of the Psalms and Canticles found
1
in that book and their Latin texts .
5. A Spanish version of our document appears in two

early printed Spanish Books of Hours of the Blessed
Virgin, of which there are copies in the British Museum.
The earliest of them is a curious and interesting little
volume, profusely decorated with prints of sacred subjects,
as is usually the case with Books of Hours. It contains
much besides the actual Office of the Hours, and was

evidently intended as a popular book of devotion. The
Athanasian Creed occurs towards the end, introduced by
the title,
'
El psalmo Quicunque vult.' It follows
'
Las
horas de los finados,' the Hours of the Deceased, and is
succeeded by a variety of prayers which close the volume.
The book is without title-page or pagination, and is
undated, mentioning the names of

for the colophon, while
the printer and publisher, omits to add, as usual, the date.

'
It is as follows Fenescan las horas de nuestra Senora
:
impressas en Paris por Nicolao Higman por el Symon

Voestre librero qui vive en Paris a la calle de nuestra
Senora.' The conjectural date therefore assigned by the
British Museum Catalogue, viz. 1497, may be safely
accepted, as at least approximately correct. For Symon
Voestre or Vostre carried on his business of publisher and
bookseller at Paris from 1484 to 1520, and Brunet mentions
a French Book of Hours printed for him by Nicholas
Higman late in the fifteenth century.
The other Spanish Book of Hours in the British Museum

which contains the Athanasian Creed was printed in Paris
1
Le livre des Psaiimes ancicnne traduction Francaise. Paris, 1876.
Versions. 331
for Guillermus Marlin in the year 1546, as we are informed
by the colophon. Of this there are two copies in the

Museum. It is not a mere reprint of the earlier Horas,
but a different book, for it contains some matter not found

in that, and omits other matter which is found there and ;
the documents which are necessarily common to both are
arranged differently. Hence the position of the Athanasian

Creed is different, but in both it has the same title and the
same text, as it
appeared to me. I may mention some
'
renderings that I noticed : the commencement, Qualquier

' '
'
verse 9 immensus is
'
que quisiere ser salvo ;

in sin
medida' 'sin medida es el Padre/ &c. ;

but in verse 12
' ' '
tres immensi is translated
'
tres grandes sin medida ;
in verse 24, '

nihil prius aut posterius nihil maius aut
'
minus is translated literally
c
no ay cosa primera ni
postrimera, ninguna cosa es maior ni menor,' and 'totae

'
'
tres personae coaeternae sibi sunt is todas tres per-
sonas son en uno siempra durables'; in verse 25 the
followed, la unidad en la trinidad y la
'
later reading is
'
trinidad en la unidad'; in verse 38, resurgere habent

'
has its exact counterpart in 'han de resuscitar'; the last

is peculiar in the reading 'cada uno fiel firmemente no
creyere.' The title of the book is
'
Horas de la Virgen
Maria segun el uso Romano con otros officios anadidas
muchas oraciones.'
Thus there are certainly extant at the present day
translations of the Athanasian Creed into Greek, English,
German, French, and Spanish, which were produced during

a period extending from the ninth century to the close of
the fifteenth. I do not by any means represent this as an
exhaustive list of the versions made and used in the Middle

Ages. On the contrary, I have no doubt that others which
were then current have since perished, and that others are
still in existence of which we cannot produce equally
abundant and sufficient evidence. Dr. Swainson mentions
an Italian version in a Milan MS. A. 145 supra shown
him by Dr. Ceriani ;
also a Bohemian one *.
1
Nicene and Apostle? Creeds, pp. 497, 498.
PART II.
CONCL USIONS.
HAYING considered the documentary evidence relating

to the history of the Athanasian Creed under the various
heads of Testimonies, Canons and Ecclesiastical Injunctions,
Manuscripts; Commentaries, Versions, we are now in a
position to arrive at some conclusions on the following
points the language in which it was composed, the date
:
when it originated, the author to whom it may be ascribed,

the titles attributed to it, its text, its use and reception in
the Church.
CHAPTER I.
THE LANGUAGE.
IN regard to the language in which the Creed was

originally composed, the argument of Waterknd is I think
conclusive The style and phraseology of the Creed its
:
'
;
early reception among the Latins, while unknown to the

Greeks the antiquity and
;
number of the Latin manu-
scriptsand their agreement for the most part with each
other,and the disagreement of the Greek copies, all concur
to demonstrate that this Creed was a Latin composure
rather than a Greek one : and as to any other language
besides these two, none is pretended V And still further,
its distinctly Latin character is emphasized by the fact,
which I shall have occasion to advert to more fully by and

by, that the terminology both in regard to the Trinity
and the Incarnation is largely borrowed from the writings
of St. Augustine, whilst several expressions in both parts
are also clearly traceable to St. Vincent of Lerins. Of the
close relation of its phraseology to that of these two Fathers
any one may by comparing the Creed as

satisfy himself
printed in Waterland's work with the parallel passages

from early writers, which he has placed by its side.
The Creed being originally drawn up in Latin

fact of the
cannot indeed be adduced as proving that it was not the
1
Waterland, Critical History of the Athanasian Creed, chap. iv. p. 66,
Oxford edition.
The Language. 335
work of the great opponent of Arianism to whom through-

out the Middle Ages it was attributed. Some persons, as
Serarius 1
maintain that it was written by him in Latin.
,
But the remarkable accordance of the phraseology of the

Creed with that of Augustine, who was not baptized
St.
until some years after the death of St. Athanastus, is
obviously fatal to a belief in the authorship of the latter.

For accordance can only be accounted for upon one of
this
two hypotheses. Either the Creed in places must have

been drawn from or based upon the words of St. Augustine,
or else he must have borrowed from the Creed. The latter
hypothesis is plainly untenable it is impossible to suppose

;
that St. Augustine could have known of the existence of

the Creed and been so familiar with it as to adopt its
terminology without even once in the course of his volu-

minous writings mentioning it as a document of authority
and the work of Athanasius. Truth then requires us to
abandon the belief in the authorship of Athanasius and ;
the various legends which have been built upon that belief
must be abandoned also, as having no foundation in history
to wit, that he drew up the Creed at the Council of Nice,
or at Treves during his exile in that city, or at Rome,
where according to Baronius he not only composed it but
presented it to Pope Julius.
1
De Symbolo Athanasiano disputatio prima. Opusculae, torn. ii. p. 7.
Moguntiae, 1611.
CHAPTER II.
THE DATE.
IN order to arrive at a conclusion with regard to the
epoch which produced the Creed, it is obviously necessary

to consider both the external and the internal evidence
bearing upon the point, the former being derived from the
documents previously noticed, the latter from the text of
our document.
To deal first with the external evidence, as is clearly
most convenient, beginning with the first half of the ninth
century, I propose to trace it upwards through each of the

preceding centuries as high as it reaches. Not many years
have elapsed since various theories respecting the date and
origin of the Quicunque were broached by persons eminent
by position and reputation, which, though widely differing,
indeed conflicting, in other respects, were agreed thus far,
that they all represented it to be the production of the
ninth century, not earlier. I deem it expedient to
Hence
commence by particularizing and summarizing the evidences
which the first half of that century furnishes of the existence
of the Creed at that epoch, and considerably prior to it also.
What are these evidences? Firstly, the Creed is quoted
or referred to by several writers of this period, and that too

as the work of St. Athanasius
by Agobard, Bishop of
;
Lyons about 820, who quotes verse 2 l by some Latin ;
1
See Part I. chap. i. 10.
The Date. 337
monks at Jerusalem in 809, who refer to it as an authority

on the subject of the Procession 1 by Theodulf, Bishop of ;
Orleans, who in a work on the Procession written in the

same year or by order of Charlemagne, quotes
shortly after,
2
several verses and yet earlier in the century by Alcuin,
;
who in a work upon the same subject also quotes several

verses. Next, the use of it was canonically enjoined at this
period in episcopal admonitions and charges so to speak :
this we learn from a series of capitula drawn up in the
dominions and during the reign of the Emperor Lothair 3 ;
also from two documents of an earlier date in the ninth
century, showing that the clergy were then required to learn

it by heart, and that their knowledge of it was one of the sub-
jects of episcopal examination and inquiry 4 ;

also from the
capitulare of Hatto, or Ahyto or Hetto, Bishop of Basle,
by which the priests of his diocese were required to learn

the Creed by heart and recite it at the hour of Prime on
Q
Sundays ;
and
from a capitulare of Theodulf, Bishop
lastly
of Orleans, who also admonishes his clergy to learn it by
heart c Next, we gather from the Epistle of Florus the
.
Deacon to Hyldrad the Abbot, that at this period, together

with the Apostles' Creed and Lord's Prayer, it was com-
monly found in Psalters subjoined to the Old and New
Testament Canticles 7 . And of this fact we have substantial
evidence in three manuscript Psalters existing at the
present day, all most interesting books : Athelstan's Psalter,
Museum MS., the original part of
as it is called, a British
which, including the Psalms and Canticles, Gloria in ex-

celsis, Lord's Prayer, Apostles' and Athanasian Creeds,
must have been written before 850 A. D., probably in
1 2 3
See Part 1. chap. i.
9. Ibid. I. i. 8. Ibid. I. ii. 6.
4 5 6
Ibid. I. ii. 4. Ibid. I. ii. 5. Ibid. I. ii. 3.
7
Ibid.l. i. 12.
338 Conclusions. [CH.
Germany the famous Utrecht Psalter, which most prob-

1
;
ably belongs to the period we are concerned with at

2
present ,
and the Psalter written in honour of the Emperor
3
Lothair or at his request in 833 or 834 . Next it appears
in two MSS. assigned to the early part of this period

Paris Bibliotheque Nationale, Latin 1451 and 3848 B
both containing collections of canons and documents re-
lating to dogma
4
And lastly, a Commentary on the
.
Quictmque, attributed to Theodulf, has recently been edited

from the library at Orleans. If rightly so attributed, it
must necessarily have been produced not later than 821,
the year of Theodulf s death, and if not, as may very
possibly be the case, still it may probably be regarded as

a work of the first half of the ninth century, inasmuch as
the MS. containing it was written in that century according
to the high authority of Monsieur Delisle 5 .
Now what are the conclusions which necessarily follow
from the particulars which I have here specified and gathered
I
together? commencement of the ninth
First, that at the
century the j\thanasian Creed was extant and secondly, ;
2- that it was then extantjn its integrity, not in an inchoate,
germinal, fragmentary, incomplete condition, but complete

as we have it now, the same document which we have in
our Prayer Books and say in our churches. For thus com-
plete and in its entirety it is found in all the MSS. here

mentioned. And
a third conclusion may be added, that it
must__have_been extant not only at the commencement of

v3 the _jiinth^_century;, but some considerable time before.
This is clear on two grounds. First, it was plainly believed
at that period to be the work of St. Athanasius, in almost
01
all the documents above mentioned being expressly ascribed
' 2 3
See Part I. chap. iii. n'. Ibid. I. iii. 10. Ibid. I. iii.
9.
4 5
Ibid. I. iii. 7, 8. Ibid. I. iv.
7.
"] The Date. 339
to him, cited as his, described by such titles as The Faith

<?f Athanasius. I am not arguing that this belief of the
age any proof that the Creed was the genuine work of
is
Athanasius, but that it proves it to have been even then

a work of some antiquity. The divines of the early part
of the ninth century had among them men of learning,
such men Theodulf and Alcuin, well versed in the
as
writings of the Fathers, and it is impossible to suppose that

they could have regarded the Qiiicunque as handed down
through successive ages from a man who had been dead
more than 400 years had it been the production of a
recent age, the preceding century or two. They knew at
least that the tradition respecting its authorship was not
of yesterday. And secondly, we found that in the first
half of the ninth century it was the subject of episcopal
admonitions and injunctions, presbyters being required to
learn it by heart and recite it under pain of incurring
canonical censure in case of disobedience that it was then ;
also admitted into and side by side with the

Psalters
Scriptural Canticles which were recited in the service, and

the Te Deum, and Lord's Prayer, and Apostles' Creed ;
that it was then also regarded as a document of weight and

authority, appealed to and quoted on matters of faith
and doctrine and lastly, that in all probability it was then
;
made the subject of a Commentary. And being thus used

and received and esteemed in the Church in the early part
of the ninth century, we may safely conclude that at that
epoch it could not have been a recent production. new A

and unknown document would not have been thus used
and esteemed. And therefore, even though no other evi-
dences than those already noticed could be alleged, a

pre-existence of some considerable duration might be
reasonably claimed for it, in which it would be disseminated
Z 2
34P Conclusions.
and become widely known, and attract the attention of the

learned, and grow into general esteem as a reliable exposi-
tion of Scriptural truth and Catholic doctrine.
But let us advance onwards, and we shall still find
further evidences to our point in preceding centuries, though

of necessity not equally abundant. The first documentary
evidence belonging to the eighth century which meets us
is the profession of faith made by Denebert in 798 A.D. at
his consecration to the bishopric of the Hwiccii,or Worcester,

in which he quotes several verses of the Athanasian Creed
1
for the purpose of declaring his faith in the Holy Trinity .
This particularly deserving of notice, because he intro-

is
duces the quotation with an expression scrip turn est

which clearly implies that in his opinion the document he
was quoting from was invested with the characters of
authority and antiquity. There are four MSS. of this
century in which our document is found either wholly or
in part. The first of these to be mentioned Paris Biblio-
theque Nationale, Latin 4858 contains a portion of it only,

'
from the commencement down to the words tres aeterni '
of verse n 2
. This appears at the bottom of the verso
side of the last leaf of the volume as it is at present,
from which one or more which no doubt comprised
leaves,
the rest of the Creed, have evidently been torn away. The
imperfect condition of the text is the consequence of this
mutilation of the MS. This codex belongs to the close of
the eighth century. In the three other MSS. we have the
Creed in its entirety. Two of these are Psalters, and no
mean Psalters, as appears from the care bestowed upon
their execution and their ornate character, as well as the
connexion of both with Charlemagne. One of them is
deposited in the Bibliotheque Nationale at Paris Latin
1 a
See Part I. chap. i. 6. Ibid. I. Hi. 6.
] The Date, 341
I 3 I 59- The Litanies at the end, in one of which Charles
King of the Franks and Lombards and

'
is prayed for as
Patrician of the Romans/ and in the two others simply

as King, while Leo is in all three prayed for as Pope, seem
clearly to prove that it must have been written between the
accession of Leo III to the Pontificate at the close of the
year 795 and the coronation of Charlemagne as Emperor

at Christmas 800
l
The other Psalter, now in the Imperial
.
Library at Vienna, appears from some dedicatory verses to

have been written for Charlemagne when King, and to
have been intended by him as a present to Pope Hadrian I.
It must therefore have been written some time during the
pontificate of the latter, which began in 772 and ended in

2
795 In the Vienna Psalter the Qnicunqite is attributed
.
to St. Athanasius by the title in the Paris book it has no ;
title. Important and interesting as these two MSS. are,

the fourth exceeds them in importance and interest, inas-
much the earliest manuscript copy of our Creed at
as it is
present extant, or at least known to be so. It is in the
Ambrosian Library at Milan, and has for its press-mark

O. 2,12,. It was transferred to its present home from the
Irish monastery at Bobio in North Italy at the beginning
of the seventeenth century, and is written in an Irish hand.
Being clearly, as I have before noticed, not the autograph

of the author, but a copy of an older MS., it is not only
evidence of the existence of the Qnicunqite in the eighth
century, but also of being extant yet earlier
3
To some
its .
it may appear at first thought a matter of surprise

persons
that we are only able to point to fouj-JVISS. of our Creed
as belonging to this century, and to none of a prior date ;
but, if the enormous waste and destruction of ancient MSS.

which has taken place in former ages, and is still
going on
1 2 s
See Part I. chap. iii.
5. Ibid. I. iii. 4. Ibid. I. iii. i.
in some degree, from a variety of causes unavoidable
decay, careless and rough usage, fire, damp, war, fanaticism,
ignorance, neglect ;
if this is considered, it will become
rather a wonder that we should be able to produce so
many MSS. of this remote epoch which have survived the

wreck. Manuscripts earlier than the ninth century are of
course comparatively rare. There is another MS. of this
century Paris Bibliotheque Nationale, Latin 3836, f. 89 r.
which, although not a MS. of our document, requires
special notice as affording distinct evidence of its antiquity,
more distinct indeed than any MS. copy of it affords. It
has been commonly regarded as a MS. of the Creed but it ;
is clearly not so, not even of a portion of it. It is a MS.
of a fragment the conclusion of a sermon or discourse

on the Apostles' Creed, delivered at the Traditio Symboli
to the catechumens or candidates for baptism, in which
the preacher adapts and modifies the latter part of the
Quicunque respecting the Incarnation. He does not quote
or reproduce the text exactly, but passes over one verse
almost entirely, and varies the language of all the verses
which he deals with more or less, of some very considerably.
Some however of the more trifling variations may possibly
be due to the copyist, not to the author of the sermon.
Now evidence supplied by this fragment of
in tracing the
the antiquity of the Quicunqtte, the point first to be noticed

is that the copyist tells us in a few words of introduction
v" that he found it at Treveri, presumably Treves. Hence
we are pointed in the first place to the MS. at Treves from
which the scribe took the transcript which we have now in
the Paris MS. of the eighth century, and the former must
obviously have been written before the latter ; and it would

appear, considerably before, as the scribe of the Paris MS.
does not seem to have regarded the document which he
The Date. 343
found at Troves as one of recent or contemporaneous

execution. Thus a certain interval of time, possibly of
considerable duration, must, as it may be reasonably sup-
posed, have occurred between his finding the Treves MS.
and its execution. And this holds equally true, whether
the MS. contained nothing but the fragment which he
transcribed, or whether it comprised the whole sermon of
which it must have formed a part. And again another
interval, possibly also ofmany years, must have elapsed
between the writing of the MS. and the composition of the
sermon, which it preserved in whole or in part, unless
indeed it was the autograph or original copy, which is very
improbable. Taking all this into consideration, we can
scarcely suppose that the sermon was composed within less
than fifty years of the date of the Paris MS., the middle of
the eighth century, and the conclusion which I have arrived
at, that it was a work of the seventh century at the latest,
seems to be a very safe one. I have also stated some

it may be
reasons for thinking probably assigned to the
preceding century *. But at the epoch when this sermon
was preached, the Athanasian Creed could not have been
a recently composed or unknown document it had evi- :
dently then attained a certain degree of esteem, perhaps

authority, as a manual of language was
instruction, its
familiar to the preacher, he would seem to have known it
by heart. It is but reasonable to suppose that a century

or thereabouts must have elapsed between the composition
of the Creed and of this sermon. Hence the evidence of \
the Treves fragment leads to the conclusion that the Creed
could not have been drawn up later than the sixth century, I
but probably originated in the fifth, indeed not after the {
middle of the fifth century. The text of the Treves frag- \
1
See Part I. chap. i.
4.
344 Conclusions.
ment is printed in Appendix A. For a fuller account of

that document and its relation to the Quicunque^ as also for
my reasons for assigning the date which I have to the
sermon, of which it contained a portion, I must refer to my

1
notice of the fragment in the first Part . Another evidence
of the existence of the Quicunque in the eighth century*
and indeed before, is supplied in the notices by Montfaucon
and Waterland of a St. Germain's MS. containing it which
2
appears now to be lost .In the title Athanasius was
described as the author. And yet another is found in the
Vatican MS. Palat. 574, though written in the ninth
century ; comprises a series of documents, the Qui-

for it
cunque being one of the number, which according to the

Ballerini was subjoined to an earlier collection in the eighth
3
century In this instance also our document is attributed
.
by the title to St. Athanasius. Lastly, to the eighth century

we have seen reason to assign two Commentaries, the
Bouhier and the Paris 4
And the Oratorian we assigned
.
6
to the end of the seventh or beginning of the eighth .
For argument's sake we will here assume that it

belongs to
the beginning of the eighth. The preface to this Com-
mentary, which is
printed in
Appendix H, requires especial
notice for the remarkable testimony which it supplies to
the antiquity of the Quicunque. The author of the ex-
position therein says that he had always seen it ascribed

by the title to Athanasius, even in ancient manuscripts G .
And, as these codices which he describes as ancient cannot

be supposed to have been less than a hundred years old at
the time, at the beginning namely of the eighth century,

1 2 3
4. Ibid. I. iii. 2. Ibid. I. iii. 12.
4 6
Ibid. I. iv.
4, 5. Ibid. I. iv. 3.
'
Traditur enim quod a beatissimo Athanasio Alexandrinae ecclesiae
antestite (sic) sit editum : ita narnque semper eum vidi praetitulatum etiam
in veteribus codicibus.'
"] The Date. 345
it appears that early_jn the_seyent_h,_ta

attributed, and[not uncommonly, to Athanasius. We know
nothing for certain of the circumstances which gave rise to
this belief in the authorship of Athanasius. Whatever they

were, whether in the first instance the Creed was ascribed
to him as a symbol of the doctrine of which he was the
most famous exponent and champion, or whether it was so
ascribed at' first simply in consequence of its being mixed
up in MSS.with other works rightly or wrongly attributed

to him, in any case it is not at all likely that this belief
sprung into being until some time after the composition of
the Creed. Then another period of some duration must
be allowed for during which it was spreading wider and
gradually growing into the general acceptance which it had
attained at the end of the seventh century and the begin-
ning of the eighth, as we are led to understand by the

Oratorian Preface. From these premisses what can we
conclude but that the Creed could not have been drawn up
later than the fifth century, probably not later than the
middle of it? One

point remains to be mentioned here,
viz. that the work referred to by the author of the Oratorian
Commentary in his Preface as ascribed to Athanasius in

ancient codices can be none other than our Athanasian
Creed, inasmuch as he quotes it from beginning to end

verseby verse. I venture to think that I have produced
from the eighth century a considerable amount of evidence
in support of the antiquity of the Q2iicunque. Almost all
these documents, it will be observed, prove its existence

not only at that period but yet earlier, some being Com-
mentaries, and in others the authorship being attributed to
St. Athanasius, whilst the Milan MS. yields internal evi-
dence to the same effect and
further, two of the number,
:
viz. the Treves fragment and the Preface to the Oratorian

Conclusions. CH.
346 [
Commentary, point to a definite conclusion as to the ap-
proximate date of its production, that it may probably be

placed not later than the middle of the fifth century. Let
us now see whether this conclusion is confirmed by the
evidence of the seventh and sixth centuries.
&- Our witnesses of the seventh century are the Autun
Canon dated about 670 A. D. 1 the Troyes Commentary ,
which emerged, as it appears, during the height of the

Monothelete controversy between 649 and 68 1 2 the Con- ,
3
fession of Faith of the Fourth Council of Toledo A. D. 633 ,
and the so-called Fortunatus Commentary, belonging, as

there reason to believe, to the early part of the century,
is
4
possibly to the close of the sixth All these, but especially .
the first, second and fourth, point to the fifth century as

the epoch which produced the Qziicunqiie^ not later. For
if it was attributed to St. Athanasius about 670, as it is in
the Canon of Autun, and if it was the subject of Com-

mentaries in the seventh century, we cannot suppose it to
have been a work of the sixth. New and unknown docu-
ments, as we have before remarked, are not made the
subjects of Commentaries, and it has been also noticed

that the belief in the authorship of St. Athanasius implies
a pre-existence of the Quicunque of some duration.
The string of evidence does not cease with the seventh
"*"
century, but runs on through the sixth and ends apparently
with the close of the fifth. Thus the Epistola Canonica
proves if indeed we may
rely on the authority of the
learned canonists, the Ballerini that in the sixth century in
one locality at least, probably a diocese of Northern Italy,
the clergy were required to learn the Athanasian Creed by
5
heart . Then there are two documents of the same cate-
1 2
See Part I. chap. ii. 2. Ibid. I. iv. 2.
3 * 5
Ibid. I. i.
5. Ibid. I. iv. i. Ibid. I. ii. i.
The Date. 347
gory as the sermon of which the Treves fragment formed

a part, sermons on the Apostles' Creed incorporating some
of the language of the Athanasian, but in a much smaller
degree. The first of these is printed in the Appendix to

1
the fifth volume of St. Augustine ,
and is attributed by the
Benedictine editors to Caesarius, Bishop of Aries from 502
to 542 2 The second is rather earlier, as appears from the
.
earlier type of the Apostles' Creed which it follows, and

may therefore be assigned probably to the beginning of
the sixth or the end of the fifth century : it was found by
me in two Paris MSS., Bibliotheque Nationale, Latin
3848 B, and 2123 3 The last particular of evidence
. I have
to allege from Avitus, Bishop of Vienne in Gaul from
is
490 to 518, whose writings exhibit two instances of verbal

coincidence with the Qtiicimque, if we may not more fitly
4
call them quotations from it . This may be evidently
considered with the last - mentioned.
contemporaneous
These four particulars clearly carry us beyond the end of
the fifth century for the origin of the Athanasian Creed,
and dispose us rather to look for it at the latest in the
middle of that century and we found that the Treves ;
fragment and the Oratorian Preface bear an accordant

testimony.
Let us now consider the internal evidence of date.
An examination of the terminology of the Creed supplies
the means of determining approximately, within well-
defined limits, the date of its composition.
The phraseology of both parts that relating to the
Trinity and that relating to the Incarnation bears a

marked, obvious resemblance to the language of St. Augus-
tine. It is not too much to say that for the most part it is
1
Migne, Patrol. Latina, torn, xxxix. p. 2194.
2 3 4
3. Ibid. I. i. 2. Ibid. I. i. i.
distinctly Augustinian in forms of expression and idiom no

less than in doctrine. The proof of this is to be found in
a comparison of verses 6 to 24, 29, 30, 31, 32, 34, 35 with
the passages from the great Latin Father placed side by
1
side with them in Waterland . The doctrinal definitions
of the Creed are clearly cast in the mould elaborated by
that great and acute and sanctified intellect. This resem-
blance of the phraseology of the Quicunque with that of
St. Augustine extends beyond the clauses defining the
doctrines of the Trinity and Incarnation it is traceable in ;
the assertion of our Lord's descent ad inferos (the true

reading in all probability, for it is found in the Ambrosial!
and the earliest MSS.), and still more remarkably in the
all
expression restirgere habent, a distinctly Augustinian mode

of expression. I have noted no fewer than fourteen instances
2
of it in the sermons alone of St. Augustine .
And
together with this general conformity of doctrinal
phraseology with the language of St. Augustine in the two
principal divisions of the Creed, instances present them-
selves in both of striking verbal coincidences with the
Commonitorium of St. Vincent of Lerins. Such instances
occur in verses 3, 4, 5, 29 and 30. The author then of the
Quicunque apparently drew his materials from work as

this
well as the writings of St. Augustine, unless indeed it was

one and the same hand which composed both the Quicunque
1
The numbering of the Latin text, which is printed in Appendix E, is here
followed.
2 '
The following are among them : Mori veni pro hominibus ? baptizari
'
non habeo pro hominibus?' Tract, in Johan. iv. 14. Isti mali praescindi
{
habent in fine.' Ser. v. 8. Respondere tibi habet caro tua ? etconfabulatura
' '
tecum, diclura tibi in tenebris Quomodo natus is fuit : ? Ser. ccxliv. 4. Ista
caro resurget ista ipsa, quae sepelitur, quae moiitur . . .
ipsa habet resurgere.'
Ser. cclxiv. 6. Modo '
dicit illucl de ore suo
. . . . .
episcopus et irridetur.
.
'
Numqdd sic irrideri habet, quando ab ipso iuclice potentissimo dicetur ? Ser.
xviii. 5.
The Date. 349
and the Commonitorium. And as no passage in our Creed

can be traced to any later source, we are necessarily led to
fix upon the year 434 A. D. the date of the Commonitorium
as the limit on the one side of the period within which it
may have been composed. What limit does internal evi-

dence point to as the conclusion of that period ?
Before this question can be answered, it is necessary to
determine whether the Creed was formed by a process of
growth spread over a great extent of time, as Dr. Swainson
has maintained, based possibly upon two independent
documents, which received accretions in the lapse of years ?
Or was it the product of one period and one mind, though
constructed of materials drawn from a variety of sources?
That the latterthe true hypothesis, the Creed itself
is
furnishes sufficient evidence in its construction, its treatment

of the subject-matter, and the style of its composition. It
isone homogeneous complete whole its two divisions have

;
a necessary natural relation, the one being complementary

to the other, so that one would be imperfect without the
other ;
both are introduced and concluded with assertions
of the necessity of belief in the dogmas severally expounded ;
'
both are remarkable for that antithetic swing which at-

'
tracted the attention of the late Dean Stanley ;

and if both
are thus remarkable for the terseness and vigour and anti-
thesis of their language, obviously due to the fact of

it is
their being largely drawn from St. Augustine, whose style

was noted by these characteristics and lastly, in both some
;
expressions are found which appear also in the works of

St. Vincent of Lerins.
We have previously concluded from external evidence

that in all probability the Creed was composed not later
than the middle of the fifth century. Is this conclusion
supported by internal evidence? I think it is. The

Nestorian controversy was not extinct in the year 434, the

earliest date, as we have seen, to which the composition of
the Creed can be assigned. It continued to be the principal
subject which agitated the Church and occupied the atten-
tion of theologians until or nearly until the year 448, when
Eutychianism emerged. Quicunque was the product
If the
of this period, we might expect that it would distinctly re-

echo the terminology which was then used by Catholics in
reference to the Incarnation the subject-matter of the
Nestorian heresy. To my mind there are distinct traces of
this terminology throughout the portion of the Creed re-
lating to the Incarnation. Let me adduce the following
instances in proof.
i. It is remarkable that the Creed repeatedly and em-
phatically asserts the Unity of Christ not fewer than four
times in as many verses, viz. verses 32, 33, 34, 35. The
Unity of Christ's Person may be said to be the distinctive
tenet constantly affirmed by the Catholics in opposition to
the Nestorians, whom they charged, and truly, with teaching

in effect two Christs,two Sons, a Christ consisting of two
personalities, divine and human. That the Creed should
affirm this doctrine in such a very marked manner must
appear all the more significant if considered side by side
with the fact of its entire silence in regard to the co-ordinate
doctrine of our Lord's two natures. For though it asserts
this latter doctrine in fact by declaring Him to be God and
man, perfect God and perfect man, still it is not so explicit
on the point as we may presume it would have been, had
it been drawn up subsequently to the rise of Eutychianism,
and as Confessions and Definitions of the Faith were, which
were drawn up subsequently to that epoch. So the Con-
fession of the Council of Constantinople held A. D. 448 :
;
We confess Christ to be of two natures after the Incarna-
"] The Date. 351
tion, in one subsistence and one person we confess one ;
Christ, one Son, one Lord V So the Definition of Faith

of the Council of Chalcedon, A.D. 451, teaches that He is
'
One and the same Christ, Son, Lord, Only-begotten in
two natures . . . the difference of the natures having been
by no means destroyed by their union V So the Confession

of Pelagius I in the middle of the sixth century professes
belief in Him as '
unus atque idem lesus Christus,' at the
same time ex duabus '
et in duabus manentibus indivisis et
inconfusis naturis.' And the Confession of Vigilius, the

immediate predecessor of Pelagius in the papacy, has
3
similar expressions .
2. 'Nam sicut anima rationalis et caro unus est homo,

ita Deus et homo unus est Christus/ verse 35.
'
For as
the reasonable soul and flesh is one man, so God and man
is one Christ' This verse is evidently drawn from St.
4
Augustine with some transposition of words The illus- .
tration of the union of the two natures in the person of

our Blessed Lord by the analogous union of the human
soul and body occurs repeatedly in the works of that
Father. was adopted by the Catholic opponents of
It
Nestorianism, particularly St. Vincent of Lerins and St.

Cyril of Alexandria. By the latter it is employed again
and again, twice in his third Epistle to Nestorius, in his
Epistles to Eulogius and Successus, three times in his

Scholia de Incarnatione^ and in his Apologeticus adversns
Theodorettun. Supposing the Creed to have been composed
during the Nestorian controversy, the comparison in such

frequent use at the time would naturally occur to the mind
of the author, and he would be led to insert it as expressed
1
Ilahn, Bibliothek der Syinbole, p. 139.
3 3
Ibid., pp. 82, 83. Ibid., pp. 271, 269, 270,
4
See Aug. injoh. Tract. Ixxviii. 3 ;
also Ep. clxxxvii. cap. 3.
in the forcible and appropriate language of St. Augustine,
with whose writings he was evidently familiar. After the

rise of Eutychianism the use of this illustration was avoided
by Catholics or employed with great caution, in consequence

of their fear of its misapplication by their opponents J .
3. Unus omnino, non confusione substantiae, sed unitate

'
personae,' verse 34.

'
One altogether, not by confusion of
substance, but by unity of person.'

This verse also is clearly constructed from the language
of St. Augustine ' Idem Deus qui homo et qui Deus idem
2 '
homo, non confusione naturae, sed unitate personae
naturae being changed to substantiae, to which I shall advert
by-and-by, and Idem Dens qui homo et qui Deus idem homo
to umis omnino obviously in order to make the verse dove-
tail with the preceding one unus autem, probably also as
more in accordance with the terminology of the period.
The verse accurately represents the Catholic position in

contrast to the Nestorian. What St. Cyril contended for
perhaps it was the most critical point of the controversy
was the Unity of our Lord's Person, the evaxris Ka6' VTTO-
aTaa-iv,or Hypostatic union in Him of the two natures, Divine
and human ;
that He was one altogether, as the Creed
states, by unity of person 3
. On the other hand, Nestorius
1
See Waterland, History of the Athanasian Creed, Oxford edition, 1870,
p. 148, with note by Le Quien.
2
. Ser. clxxvi. cap. i.
3
The second Anathematism of Cyril was Ei TIS ovx 6fj.o\ojei ffapal Ka.6'
:
viruffTCLfftv f/vuaOai TOV ! ecu TraTptis Aoyov eva re (Tvai Xpiarbv fierci TTJS iSias
ffapicus, TOV O.VTOV STI\OVL,TI Otov o/itoO ical avOpcairov, avaOefta effrca. Similar
language is repeatedly used in his second and third Epistles to Nestorius. That
the word viroffraffis here must be understood in the sense of person is obvious
from the fact that in the fourth Anathematism it occurs as a convertible and
equivalent term with irpoffanrov : ns irpoffuirois Svalv rjyovv iiiroffrafffffi, &c. ;
and similarly twice in his third Epistle to Nestorius. The tvaiffis KO.&' \moaraaiv
of St. Cyril was therefore identical with the unitas personae of St. Augustine
reaffirmed by the Creed.
"] .
The Date. 353
refused to acknowledge more than a conjunction or

of the two natures in Christ, and that only in dignity, or
l
authority, or power Further, whilst Cyril thus asserted
.
the union in our Lord's Person of the two natures or sub-

stances,he was careful to repudiate the charge, repeatedly
urged against him by Nestorius, that he was guilty of con-
2
founding or mingling them Christ was one altogether,
.
not by confusion of substance, but

by unity of Person.
'
4. Qui, licet Deus sit et homo, non duo tamen, sed
unus est Christus,' verse 32; 'Who, although He be God
and man, yet He is not two, but one Christ.' Although He
be God and man. These words clearly must have been
written at a time when
was an acknowledged, admitted
it
principle, acknowledged even by the party whose error the

writer was combating, that Christ was both God and man,
when the error contended against was not the denial of
His twofold nature, but of the Unity of His Person. The
argument will be more apparent if we compare
force of this
with this verse of the Creed the following precisely similar
but converse proposition of St. Leo in his celebrated Epistle
Qttamvis in Domino lesu Christo Dei et
'
to Flavian :
hominis una persona sit, aliud tamen est unde in utroque

contumelia, aliud unde communis est gloria. De nostro
enim illi est minor Patre humanitas, de Patre illi est
aequalis cum Patre divinitas.' Although there be One

Person in the Lord Jesus Christ. When Leo wrote these
words, the Unity of Christ's Person was not the point at
issue; on the contrary, it was a principle acknowledged and
maintained by Eutyches whom he was opposing : the error,
the former contended, was not the denial of the Unity of
1
See the 2nd Anathematism of Cyril, also Nestorii Sermones, translated by
Marius Mercator in Migne, Patrol. Lat. torn, xlviii. pp. 757-766.
2
Particularly in his letter to John of Antioch.
A a
Christ's Person, but of His twofold nature. If this passage
isplainly the product of the Eutychian epoch, the verse of

the Creed is no less plainly the product of the Nestorian
epoch.
5.
*
Dominus noster lesus Christus, Dei Filius, Deus
pariter et homo est : Deus est ex substantia Patris ante
saecula genitus, homo ex substantia matris in saeculo
natus.'
'
Our Lord Jesus Christ the Son of God is God
and man ;
God of the substance of the Father begotten
before the worlds, and man of the substance of His mother
'
born in the world ;

verses 30, 31.
The two nativities of our blessed Lord, so frequently
asserted by St. Augustine as by the Fathers in general and
Confessions of Faith, and here reasserted, were expressly
denied by Nestorius and his school; and this denial was
a clear proof that they divided Christ into a twofold
personality, divine and human. In his third Sermon he

declared that God the Word was not born of Mary, but
'
abode in him who was born of her'; and his audacious

profanity provoked a serious tumult in the church, one
of the congregation, Eusebius, afterwards Bishop of Dory-
laeum, but then a layman, shouting out amid general

applause that God the Word underwent a second nativity.'
'
Afterwards the preacher repudiated in so many words the

two nativities 1 Theodoret in like manner denied that
.
God the Word was born of the Virgin, and therefore

2
rejected the double nativity .
1
See Marii Mercatoris Opera in Migne, Patrol. Lai. torn, xlviii. pp. 769-771.
Nestorius' Sermons are extant only in Marius Mercator's translation. Also
Hefele's Councils, vol. iii. p. 14, English translation. St. Cyril Alex, said of
Nestorius els vloiis Svo /j.epiet rbv 'iva ical irfpov n\v lSi/ca>s eivat ijtrjcrl vlbv Kal
:
Xpiorij/ ical Kvptov rov e/c Qeov irarpos jevvr]dfvra Xojov, 'irepov Se iraXiv ava
fJLfpos re ical Iducuis vto.v ical XptaTov teal Kvpiov e/c rfjs nyias irap&tvov. Cyrilli
Rp. ad Acacittm.
z
Thus Theodoret
-
:
'
Si non est factum caro Deus Verbum, sed carnem vivam
The Date. 355
The two nativities being thus denied by the Nestorians,

we should expect to find an affirmation of their truth in
the Athanasian Creed, up while the if it was drawn
controversy respecting the heresy of Nestorius was still
raging,though it could not of itself determine the origin of
the Creed to that period, similar dogmatic statements
being found commonly in the writings of Fathers and

Confessions of P'aith from the emergence of Apollinarianism
downwards.
But the verse under our consideration has a more
close and
bearing upon the Nestorian hypothesis.
critical
Nestorius argued in the Sermon previously mentioned that

God the Word could not have been born of Mary, inasmuch
as were so the law of nature would be violated, that
if it
the child must needs be consubstantial with the mother of

whom it is born 1
. It was a plausible argument, and the
author declared in writing to Pope Celestine that he had
2
found it a very effectual one also . In his work on the
et rationabilem assumpsit, non ipse natura ex Virgine natus est conceptus et

fictus et formatus et incle initium, tit esset, accipiens, qui ante saecula est, et
Dens, et apud Deum semper, et Patri adhaerens.' S. Cyrilli Apologeticus
adversus Thcodorctum, Latin translation See Marii Mercatoris Opera, Migne,

Patrol. Lat. vol. xlviii. p. 972. In answer to Theocloret, St. Cyril says of the
Nestorians :
'
Non patiuntnr vel sentire vel clicere ipsum Dei Patris Verbum,
quod erat ante saecula Filius, novissimis temporibus inconfuse inconvertibili-
terque adunatum esse ex vulva carni habenti animam rationabilem ac sic fuisse
hominem similem nostri.' Ibid. p. 975.
1 '
non hominis natura, sed Dens Verbum erat, quern ilia pariebat, quae
Si
peperit, nequaquatn mater eitis, qui natus est, invenitur quomodo enim ;
aliqua net eius mater, qui a natura genitricis est alienus ? Quod si vera mater
ab iis appellatur, ergo qtu editns est, non Divinitatis natura est, sed homo, si-
quidem proprium omnis est matris consubstantivum sibi parere. Ergo non erit
mater, quae consubstantivum sibi minime peperit.' Nestorii Sermo iii, as
translated by Marius M creator, Migne, Patrol. Lat. vol. xlviii. pp. 768, 769.
a
'Aestimo famam praecedenlem, quod non frustra certaverimus, sed emendati
sint gratiaDomini multi ex his qui perversi erant, disccntcs a nobis quia debet
essefarienti opovaios nativitas.' Epistola \ Nestorii ad Caelestinum Papam.
This, as his two other Epistles to Celestine, exists only in a Latin translation.
A a 3
356 Conclusions.
Incarnation, which was written at the request of Leo, at

the time Archdeacon, afterwards Bishop, of Rome, for the
purpose of confuting the errors of Nestorius, Cassian

replied to this argument, first by insisting on the birth of
our blessed Lord as an event entirely supernatural, and
secondly by asserting Him to be of one substance with the

mother of whom He was born in time as well as with the
Father of whom He was begotten before all ages, with
the former in respect of His human nature, with the latter
in respect of His Divine nature
1
No doubt also the .
Creed of the Antiochenes, which was drawn up at the

Council of Ephesus by John of Antioch and the party of
Eastern Bishops who refused to act with St. Cyril, but
which the year 433 became the basis of reunion between
in
the two parties, has the same reference in representing our

Lord to be consubstantial with the Father in respect of
His Godhead and consubstantial with us in respect of His
manhood. The Athanasian Creed in affirming our Lord
to be
f
God
of the substance (ex substantial} of the Father'
and at the same time ' man of the substance (ex substantial)
of His mother,' while in perfect harmony with Cassian and
the Creed of the Antiochenes, goes deeper and strikes at
It is printed among the works of Marius Mercatnr in Migne, Patrol. Lat. torn,
xlviii. pp. 174-178.
1
Magno videlicet peifidiae atque impietatis suae argumtnto ad neganclum ac
'
persequendum Dominum Deum uteris, dicens, homoousios parenti debet esse

nativitas. No dum ad plenum dico ac profero in Dei nativitate penitus hoc
non esse servandum, quia non parientis fuit nativitas ipsa, sed nati et ipse ;
natus est ut voluit, cuins fuit hoc ipsum ut nasceretur. Interim qui homoousion
parenti dicis nativitatem esse debere, ego Dominum lesum Christum homo-
ousion dico fuisse et Patri pariter et matri. Secundum divinitatem homo-
. . .
ousios Patri, sccundum carnem homoousios matri fuit.' Cassiani de Incarnationc

Christi lib. vi. cap. 13. Ti is treatise must have been written in 430. The
apostrophe addressed to Nestorius and the exhortation to the faithful at
Constantinople at the end show that it was composed before the Council of
Ephesus ;
the above passage proves it to be subsequent to Nestorius' third
Sermon and his first Epistle to Pope Celestine.
"] The Date. 357
the very root of the error of Nestorius in refusing to
acknowledge that the Divine Word was born of the

blessed Virgin. In his fourth and fifth Sermons, preached
in answer to Proclus, Bishop of Cyzicus, the heresiarch
dwells more fully upon the doctrine of the Incarnation, and
the unreal and illusory character of his hypothesis comes
more clearly to light. He speaks of 'God, the Word of
the Father, being associated with him who was born of
Mary/ of the Word of God passing through the blessed

f
Virgin in conjunction with the man to whom she gave

birth/ and declares,
'
that God passed through the Virgin
Christotocos I have been taught by Scripture, that He was
born I have not been taught V
With such teaching as
this the assertion of the Creed, which is re-echoed by the
words of thankful commemoration put into our lips by the
Church upon Christmas Day 2 stands ,
in obvious contrast.
And the language of the Quicunque may fitly be compared

with similar expressions which were elicited by the Nestorian
controversy, as that of St. Cyril :
'
We assert that the very
Word, who was substantially begotten of God the Father,

was made like unto us and became incarnate and was
made man, that is, took unto Himself a body of the holy
Virgin and made it His own. For so there shall be truly
3
one Lord Jesus Christ, so we shall worship Him as one,

not dividing Him as God and man, but believing Him to
1
Nestorii Sermo v, published among the works of Marius Mercator, as
translated by him, Migne, Patrol. Lat. torn, xlviii. pp. 786, 787.
2
The Preface for Christmas Day ' Because Thou didst give Jesus Christ
:
Thine only Son to be born as at this time for us, who by the operation of the
Holy Ghost was made very man of the substance of the Virgin Mary His
Mother.' It is very remarkable that this Preface, so thoroughly Catholic, so
directly subversive of Nestorianism, was inserted in place of the more ancient

one in our first Reformed Prayer Book of 1549. Procter, History of the Prayer
Book, 5th edition, p. 347.
3
be rffs ajias -napQevov.
Conclusions. CH.
358 [
be one and the same Person, partaking of Godhead and

manhood, that is at once God and man V And again We :
'
are assured that He, i.e. the Word, assumed flesh of the
holy Virgin V And St. Vincent of Lerins In uno eodem- '

:
que Christo duae substantiae sunt ;

sed una divina, altera
humana, una ex Patre Deo, matre Virgine.' And altera ex
Proclus in the Sermon already alluded to, which was
preached in the presence of Nestorius with immediate

argument that the Word could not have
reference to his
been born of Mary as not partaking of her substance, and
which was answered by Nestorius in the Sermons from
which I have quoted It does not pollute Him who
'
:
cannot be contaminated to proceed from the womb of the
Virgin'; 'if the Word had not dwelt in the womb of the
Virgin, flesh would never have been seated on the throne';

c
He who is by nature King and God clothed Himself in
a body from the Virgin'; God, 'while giving
the Spirit,
received flesh both with the Virgin and from the Virgin :
the Spirit indeed overshadowed her, but He Himself was

made flesh of her V
Hence, inasmuch as the doctrine which was symbolized
by the term Theotocos as used and insisted on by Catholics
is distinctly expressed in this passage of the Creed, the
absence from it of that term, or rather of any of its Latin
equivalents as Dcipara or Dei genitrix, cannot be alleged
as proof that was not the product of the Nestorian
it
epoch. Nor yet would the bare use of the term, if it were
found in the Creed, be of itself a proof that it was the
product of that age. For the term was no certain test of
1
Cont. Nestoriu/n, lib. ii.
2
Ibid., Ep. ad Acaciuni : rov rov Qeov Aoyoi/ . . . f/c rrjs djlas irapOevov
\aj3eTv Tr)v aapica SiafiepaiovpeOa.
3
'Ex ea' in the Latin. For the Latin translation of this Sermon see
Migne, Patrol. Lat. torn, xlviii. pp. 775-781.

"] The Dale. 359
orthodoxy. Nestorius repeatedly declared his readiness

to accept and use it in a certain sense. The different
meanings attached to it by the Nestorian party on the one
side and the Catholics on the other are contrasted in
the following objections urged by
passages from the
Theodoret, who certainly agreed in the main with Nestorius
at the time when the controversy was at its height, to the
Anathematisms of Cyril. In the course of his remarks on
the first Anathematism Theodoret says :
'
God the Word
was not Himself naturally born of the Virgin and conceived
and framed and formed but He framed for Himself . . .
a temple in the Virgin's womb, and associated Himself

with him who was framed and born. Wherefore also we
call that holy Virgin the mother of God, not as having
given birth to God naturally, but as having given birth to
a man, united to God, who had framed him V This
passage was quoted and censured by the Fifth General
Council. In his reply St. Cyril says: 'We denounce with
the utmost possible earnestness those who refuse to confess
that the holy Virgin is mother of God, because she gave
birth to the Word of God according to the flesh': and
'
We affirm that the Word from God the Father, having
taken upon Him the holy and animated flesh and having
been truly united to it, yet without confusion, came forth
man from the very womb, but that He still continued to
be very God and on this account the holy Virgin is
;
mother of God V So that what the Creed avers, that the

1
Ovic avros, i. e. u eos Ao-yos, (pvffei kic rrjs irapOevou yejfi'^rjrat ffv\\r]<j>9eis
KO.I 8tair\a.ffOeis ical [toptpcadds . . . dAA' eavry vaov kv rrj TrapGevucrj 'yaffrpl Sia-
7rA.dcras ffvfTJv rqj T\aff&evTt /cat 'yevvi]6evTi' ov X^P lv lca^ T ^l v o/yio^v kicfivrjv
napOevov Oeoro/cov Trpoffayopevn[j.fv } oi>x &s Oftiv (pvfffi ^fvvrjaaaav, dAA.' o>s
dvOpajnov, rw Siarr\affavTi avruv, r}viankvov &e>. S. Cyrilli Alex. Opera, torn,

vi. p. 204, edit. Paris, 1638.
2
HXeiarrjv offrjv Treiroirj/ieBa 7T\v iiarafioTjv rwv 6(j.o\oyeiv ovic avexofttvuv . . .
ori Oeoruicos fffrlv fj d-yta irapOevos, OTI 'yeyfvvr]Ke Kara aapica. TUV rov Qeov
Son or Word, who is God of the substance of the Father,

is also man made so ex substantia matris of the sub-
stance of His mother, is the very
point which the orthodox
contended for as symbolized by the title Theotocos applied
to the Virgin Mary.
6.
'
Perfectus Deus, perfectus homo ex anima rational! et
humana carne subsistens.'

'
Perfect God and perfect man, of a reasonable soul and
human flesh subsisting'; verse 30,
Considering how largely the phraseology of the Creed

is borrowed from St. Augustine, it is notable that the
expression perfectus Deus, perfectus homo is not to be
'
'
found in the writings of that Father, though no doubt the

doctrine which it conveys is implicitly taught by him again
and again. He has totus Deus et totus homo V but not
'
homo,' so far as I am able to

Deus
'
perfectus et perfectus
discover. Nor is it to be found in Hilary of Poitiers,

says what is equivalent
'
though he habens in se et totum :
verumque quod homo est et totum verumque quod Deus

2
est .' Nor does St. Leo appear to make use of the
expression, though he has repeatedly 'venis Deus, verus

'
homo or the like, and in his Epistle to Flavian totus in '
suis, totus in nostris.' But it appears in the Cointnonitoriuni

of St. Vincent of Lerins, a work which sprung out of the
Nestorian controversy y And it is impossible to avoid .
connecting the term thus occurring in the Creed and the

Commonitoriiim with the very similar one used once, and,
A.6yov. And, Aia/3e/3ajot;/xe#a rbv IK Qeov Trarpbs Aoyov, ev TrpoirKr)if/et yeyovora

TTJS ayias re teal e^vôv (vcaGevra re /car' d\r)detav davyxyrcas, IK
ffap/cos,
fj.rjTpas avrrjs irpoe\0eTv avQputrov' {Aefievrjicevai 5 Kal ovrca Qedv aXrjQivov, ravrj)
TOI icai Oeor6icos earlv 77 ayla irapOevos.
1
Ser. ccxciii. 7.
2 >
Trinitatc, lib. x. cnp. 19.
3
Commonitorium primum. See Migne, Patrol. Lat. torn. i.
p. 656.
The Date. 361
as far as I can ascertain, once only by the great leader of

the Catholics in that controversy -perfect God and perfect
man 1
,
and also used. in the Union-Creed of the Antiochenes
a document which occupied a conspicuous position in
the same controversy and must have been perfectly well
known throughout Christendom, Western as well as Eastern,
inasmuch as it wasorthodox by St. Cyril and
accepted as
was made the basis of union, as has been already mentioned,
between him and the party who -seceded from him at the
Council of Ephesus. It was originally drawn up by John
Bishop of Antioch and his friends in their conciliabulum
held during the sitting of that Council, and sent to the
Emperor Theodosius as their Confession of Faith in a

Latin translation. The passage referred to is in that
translation 'Deum perfectum et hominem perfectum ex
anima rational! et corpora V in the original Btov reAaoy KOL
3
&v6pu>irov re'Aetoy e/c
\}sv)(fjs AoyiKr/j KCU crw/âro?
Probably .
both St. Cyril and the Antiochenes borrowed the expression

Athanasius, who makes use of it ; and thus the
4
from St.
Creed, though drawn up in Latin, would owe this distinctive

and significant term to the illustrious Eastern theologian,
to whom it was formerly ascribed.
The language of the Creed defining the perfect humanity
of our Lord also reproduces the terminology of the Nes-
torianepoch. Perfectus '
homo ex anima rational! et
'
humana carne subsistens perfect man of
'
;
a reasonable
1
"Em ical TOV aiiruv 'lap.ev rbv 8ia rrjs ayias irapQivov GeoroKov Mapias
yevvi)9evTa Oetiv rzKeiov ical avQpcimov reXfiov, e/Atf/vxov, Xoytieov. S. Cyrilli
dc Incarnatione Vcrbi Dei Filii Patris. He expresses the same truth more
fully elsewhere, as for instance, laairep Iv Oforrjn re\eios OVTU ical kv aj/dpoairo-
rtjTL rehetos. De Incarnatione Unigeniti.

2
Concilia, Labbe, torn. iii. p. 1091 ;
Paris.
3
Hefele's Councils, English translation, vol. iii.
pp. 94 and 131, and Halm,
Bibliolhek der Symbolc, p. 137.
4
Cont. Apollinarium, i. 16.
Conclusions. CH.
362 [
soul and human flesh subsisting.

5
It will be observed that
in thewords of the Creed of the Antiochenes quoted above,
our Lord in respect to His human nature is described as
'
perfect man of a reasonable soul and body.' And this the

Creed appears to follow with the exception of the word
body, instead of which it has adopted the expression human
flesh. Why was this change, which is clearly not without
meaning Some light may be thrown upon the point by
?
reference to the writings of St. Augustine, with which the

author of the Creed was evidently familiar. In one passage,
speaking in reference to i Cor. xv. 40, that Father dis-

criminates between corpits and caro :
'
Omnis caro corpus
est non autem omne corpus
; caro, non solum quia caeleste
1
corpus non dicitur caro/ &C. Elsewhere, addressing him-
self especially to the Manichean denial of the verity of our
Lord's human nature, he adopts the more critical term
caro hzimana :
'
De ipso homine si quaeris a me, duo iterum
dico : Anima humana et caro
corpus humana V The word
would not of unequivocally exclude the heretical
itself
notion of a celestial superhuman body belonging to our

Lord a notion inconsistent with the belief that He, the
Son of God, was made very man of the substance of the
Virgin Mary His mother. Accordingly we find the more

critical term cropping up in the Nestorian controversy, and
used by Nestorians as well as Catholics. St. Cyril and his

friendswere frequently charged by their opponents with
Apollinarianism And he was not only charged with
3
.
holding the distinctive tenet of Apollinaris by denying that
1
Ser. ccclxii. cap. xviii.
2
Ser. ccxxxvii. cap. ii. So also '
suscepit animam humanam et carnem
humanam.' Collatio cum Maximino, 14.
3
See the Epistle of Nestorius to Pope Celestine, Migne, Patrol. Lat.
first
torn, xlviii. p. ;
also his seventh Sermon, ibid, pp. 792, 793 also remarks
176 ;
of Theodoret on the eleventh Anathematism of Cyril, ibid. p. 998.

n.] The Date. 363
our Lord had a human rational soul, but also with holding
another tenet ascribed to him in common with Manichaeus
and Valentinus, that alluded to shortly before, which was
opposed to the verity of His human body or flesh. In his
celebrated letter to John Bishop of Antioch, after reciting
the Union-Creed which John had sent for his acceptance,
and declaring his adhesion to it and giving utterance to his
feelings of joy and thankfulness for the restoration of peace
and unity thus effected between the Churches of Antioch
and Alexandria, he adds that he had been accused of
teaching that the holy body Of Christ was brought from
heaven and not taken from the blessed Virgin 1 In conse- .
quence no doubt of these imputations, St. Cyril not only

2
constantly affirms that our Lord had a reasonable sonl ,
but also makes use of the other critical term hitman flesh "'.
Both these terms were recognized and used by the Nesto-

rians, who would be careful to assert the truths which they
charged others with denying. Of this we have a con-
spicuous example in Theodore

the Profession of Faith of
of Mopsuestia, which must have been well known to all
theologians of the age, inasmuch as it was brought before
the Council of Ephesus, and was rendered accessible to
Latins by the contemporary translation of Marius creator. M
The passage referred to is in the original, avOpca-nov re'A.eioy
re
1
ovic be rfjs a-fias irapdfvov XeyovTos TO
l
'Cis l
ovpavov ica ruKO(JLiaQlv ical
ajiov trcD/ua XpicrroS.

2
For instance, "nffTrep "yap \ariv ev Oeorijri re\etos . . . ovroj teal kv avdptairu-
Tfkeios Kara. 76 rov rrjs avOpajfroTTjTos \6jov, ovic a\f/vx.ov \a@u)v aaiâ,
Se fid\\ov ûxi? hoyucfj. De recta fide ad Arcadiam Marinamqm.
He seems habitually to avoid using the word crw/na in this connexion without
thus guarding it.
3
Thus, Karairecppiicaai yap ovic 018' OTTWS ^vxaideiari tyvxy \oyucr) rrj avQpu-
vri ffapicl
icara <pvffiv fjvuiaQai TOV A.UJOV bpoXoyeiv. De Incarnations
Unigeniti
*
liahn, Bibliothek der Symbole, p. 231.
Conclusions. CH.
364 [
in the translation of Marius Mercator, 'hominem natura

perfectum, ex anima rational! et h'umana carne compo-
situm V A large portion of this Profession, including the
above words, is quoted and commented on by St. Cyril,
who deals with it

apparently as the recognized statement
and representation of the Nestorian position, not referring
to it work of Theodore, but introducing his quotation
as the
with the word </>cun 2 In the Excerpta ex libra Nestorii^
.
translated by Marius Mercator, it is headed Symbolum

Nestorianwn. Theodore was the master of Nestorius, and
is often regarded as the real author of Nestorianism. In
regard to the above passage it must be remembered that

the error of these teachers did not consist in the denial of
our Lord's perfect humanity, which indeed they both
affirmed, but in the denial of the unity of His Person.
The two terms to which we are referring anima rationalis
and Jiumana caro being thus known and used in the
Nestorian epoch, it might be expected, if the Creed was
drawn up at that period, that the author would have intro-
duced them for the purpose of defining and emphasizing
the humanity of our blessed Lord, more especially as he
was a disciple of St. Augustine, and could not fail to be
acquainted with their occurrence in the works of that Father,

which were the main source of his terminology. And a
yet further reason for the substitution of the latter of these
terms for the word corpus or body used in the same con-
nexion in the Creed of Antiochenus suggests itself in the
fact of its greater exactness and its fitness to meet an error
which was rife at the time and was imputed to no less
a person than St. Cyril.

The Definition of Chalcedon, it is very remarkable,
1
Mercatoris Opera apud Migne, Patrol. Lot. torn, xlviii. p. 877.
2
He quotes it in his treatise, Quod units cst Chris tus, 728.
"] The Date. 365
follows the Creed of the Antiochenes in affirming our Lord

to be of a reasonable soul and body. The Jmmana came
therefore of the Athanasian Creed, so far from being a
proof that it was composed after that Council, is rather
evidence of the contrary. If composed after the Council,

itwould, we should suppose, have adopted its phraseology.
Nor does the term, though strictly applicable to Euty-
chianism, in reference to which it is used by St. Leo, prove
it to be a product of the Eutychian controversy: for it has
been shown to be of earlier origin as early as St. Au-
gustine. But condemns Eutychianism by antici-
it clearly
pation, and was intended no doubt to strike at the doctrine
that our blessed Lord had taken to Himself a heavenly
body, a doctrine which was actually anathematized by the

Fathers of Chalcedon. If Eutychianism was what St. Leo
represented it to be, a revival of Manichaeanism and
Apollinarianism, it is clearly to no purpose to point to the
language of the Creed originally directed against the errors
of Apollinaris, but necessarily applying equally to the later
heresy which reproduced them, and which was actually

condemned at Chalcedon, as proving it to have been drawn
up subsequently to that Council. Passages in abundance
might be quoted from St. Augustine which would appear
to have been written for the very purpose of confuting the
opposite heresies of Nestorius and Eutyches (so exactly
does his language apply to them), but which were really
aimed against earlier heresies, of which these were severally
the counterparts, perhaps the fruit but this does not prove
;
that St. Augustine lived and wrote subsequently to the

Councils at which Nestorius and Eutyches were con-
demned.
7.
'
Unus autem, non conversione Divinitatis in carnem,

sed adsumptione humanitatis in Deum.'
366 Conclusions. CH.
[
One, not by conversion of the Godhead into flesh, but

'
'
by taking of the manhood unto God verse 34. ;
I have reser-ved this verse to be noticed last of those
referring to the Incarnation on account of the doubt attach-

ing to the readings in carnem and in Deum. With the
exception of two ninth-century MSS., Vat. Palat. 574 and
St. Gallen 27, all the early MSS. of the Creed read in came
and in Deo. We are clearly therefore not in a position to
base any argument upon the language of this verse in its
entirety according to the received text. For that would

be to assume the truth of the disputed readings. But
apart from these words, and leaving in abeyance for the
nonce the question whether or not they are rightly read in
the received text, we may

safely maintain that this verse
also breathes, so to speak, the atmosphere of the Nestorian
period. As the Catholics were accused of Apollinarianism

by their adversaries, so in particular they were commonly
charged with teaching a change of the divine substance in
Christ. In repudiating the charge they asserted that He
had become flesh not by casting away what He had been
and was, but by the assumption of flesh or manhood, still
abiding truly God The Nestorian hypothesis involved

1
.
a twofold personality in Christ, of God who assumed and

2
of the man who was assumed According to the Catholic .
1
Oi'/c a.Trof3e@\7]Kws TO ilvai 0eos not rb IK Qeov yeyevvfjffOai Harpos, dAAa ical
ev Trpoff\rjt//ei ffapicbs /j,ffêvr)/cws oirep ^v. S. Cyrilli ad Ncstorium sectmda

epistola. Similarly the Third. And, el Se or) \eyotro ffap/caj6T)vai ical evavBpu-
TTT)ffai 6ebs &v 6 Au-yos, SieppifpOca TTOV fjiaicpav rpoirrjs
viroij/ia' ^f/JLevrjice jap oirep
fjv . . . Oeus yap &v yejovev avBpanros ov T& eli/ai Qeos d(f>eis, tv irpoff\-f]\f/et oe
/j,d\\ov aaptcbs ical aip.aros yeyovus. S. Cyrilli Ep. ad Acacium.

Divinam naturam corporatum hominem assumpsisse.' Nestorii Ser. xiii.
2 '
And, 'In assumpto Deus est, ex illo qui assumpsit; qui assumptns est, appella-
tus est et appellatur Deus.' Ibid., Ser. i. And Theodoret in his objections to
the twelfth Anathematism of Cyril says :
'
Non Deus passus est, sed homo qui
ex nobis a Deo assumptus est.' S. Cyrilli Apologeticus adversus Theodorelum,
Marius Mercator's translation, Migne, Patrol. Lat. torn, xlviii. p. looo.
n.] The Date. 367
faith Christ is one altogether, and He is so not by con-

version of the Godhead, but by the assumption of the
manhood. For God the Word assumed not a man's person,
but the nature of man ;
not a perfect man, but human
'
nature in its perfection.

'
The flesh,' says Hooker 1 ,
and
the conjunction of the flesh with God began both at one
instant ;
His making and His taking to Himself our flesh
was but one act, so that in Christ there is no personal
subsistence but one, and that from everlasting. By taking
only the nature of man He still continued! one person, and
changeth but the manner of His subsisting, which was
before in the mere glory of the Son of God, and is now in
the habit of our flesh.'

The above reasons and considerations, I venture to sub-
mit, point clearly to the conclusion that the portion of the
Qidcunque relating to the Incarnation was drawn up soon

after the Council of Ephesus and before the rise of Euty-
chianism, between the year 433, when the Creed of the
Antiochenes was accepted by St. Cyril of Alexandria, and
448. The terminology is such as might be expected to
emanate from an orthodox theologian at that period, who
being thoroughly conversant with the writings of St. Au-
gustine would be led to adopt largely the language of that
Father. There is but one verse in this portion of the Creed
which I have not noticed at all in the above remarks
'
verse 31, His Godhead,
equal to the Father as touching
and inferior to the Father as touching His manhood.' But
this, being literally borrowed from St. Augustine, clearly
contains nothing inconsistent with the conclusion we have

arrived at in regard to the date of the context in which it
appears.
We have already stated that there are good reasons for
1
Eccles. Polity, v. 52. 3. .
believing the Creed to be the work of one hand and one

age. And there is nothing in the other portions of it in
any degree irreconcileable with the date which has here

been assigned to that relating to the Incarnation. Rather
there is much to confirm it. The doctrine of the holy
Trinity is in substance formulated as it had been formulated

by St. Augustine, who died, it will be remembered, A. D.
430 ;
it is stated for the most part in forms of expression
and phraseology which may be found in the writings of
that Father, as any one may perceive by comparing the
quotations from those writings, as printed in Waterland's

treatise, Oxford edit, pp. 178-181, with the corresponding
verses of the Creed. And there are a few expressions in
this, as in the latter part, which seem traceable to St.
Vincent's Commonitorium as their source.

Nor do verses 36 to 39 inclusive, which follow the Ex-
position of the Incarnation, bear any trace of being the

product of a later age. As a whole, they are peculiar to
the Qnicunque. Though they necessarily contain much
which is likewise found in the Apostles' Creed, they also
contain matter which is not there, and omit some Articles
which are there. They cannot be said therefore to be
drawn from that formula, nor indeed are they borrowed
from any other Latin Confession of Faith. '
Passus est
'
pro salute nostrais, apprehend, almost peculiar to the

I
Athanasian Creed, the only other Confession of Faith in

which I have been able to find it being that of Pope
Pelagius I. Then the omission of any mention of the
Crucifixion, Death, and Burial is another peculiarity.

'
'
Descendit ad inferos very rarely found in Confessions
is
of Faith J
. We have c
descendit ad inferna in the received
'
1 ' '
There can be no doubt that ad inferos is the right reading. It is found
in theAmbrosian MS., the most ancient MS. of the Creed extant ;
also in
The Date. 369
text of the Apostles' Creed, also in a Spanish and a Gallican

1 '
Creed, and descendit in inferna in the Aquileian Creed

c
.
But the only Confessions of Faith besides the Quicunque

'
which have '
descendit ad inferos are an Irish Creed in
the Bangor Antiphonary preserved in a seventh or eighth
century MS. belonging to the Ambrosian Library at Milan,
and the Confession of Faith of the Fourth Council of
Toledo, held A. D. 633. which is remarkable for some other
instances of verbal coincidence with the Quicnnque'2 Con- .
sidering how
largely the Creed adopts the language of
St. Augustine, it seems probable that it has borrowed this
expression also from that Father, who frequently makes use

of it. Thus he says :
'
Quis, nisi infidelis, negaverit fuisse

'
apud inferos Christum ? Ep. clxiv. 3.
The
descent of our blessed Lord into hell appears to
have been very much dwelt upon at the time of the
Nestorian controversy as supplying an argument against
3
Apollinarianism a heresy which occupied a prominent
,
place in the theological discussions of that epoch, being
Palat. 574, Paris 13159, and indeed all the early MSS. of the Creed. The only
'
authorities for ad inferna are the MSS. of the Fortunatus and the Oratorian
'
Commentaries. '
Ad inferna
'
is also the reading of the Treves fragment in
Paris Latin 3836 but as that document is obviously a portion of a homily or

;
address delivered at the Traditio Symboli, and not of the Qtticzmque, in-
corporating some of its language but not adhering to it closely, it cannot be
adduced for determining the true text. In these words it
probably follows the
Apostles' Creed, as it does expressly in the Article '
Sedet ad dexteram Dei
patris.'
1
See liahn, Bibliothek der Symboh, pp. 25, 35, 38, 39, 46.
2
Ibid., pp. 40, 162.
3
Now the error of Apollinarius was,' says Bishop Pearson, Exposition of
'
the Creed, Article V, that Christ had no proper intellectual or rational soul,
'
but that the Word was to Him in place of a soul and the argument produced ;
by the Fathers for the conviction of this error was, that Christ descended into
hell, which the Apollinarians could not deny and that this descent was not ;
made by His Divinity, nor by His body, but by the motion and presence of His
soul, and consequently that He had a soul distinct both from His flesh and
from the Word.'
B b
constantly, as I have already mentioned, imputed by the

Nestorians to their adversaries, and the Orthodox no less
constantly repudiating the charge
1
Hence the express .
mention of the descent into hell, side by side with the

silence respecting the crucifixion, death and burial of our
Lord, which may be said to.be a distinctive peculiarity of

the Athanasian Creed, as compared with other Confessions
of Faith, is a confirmatory evidence of its production in
the period when Nestorianism was the chief topic of debate
in Christendom.
In verse 37, 'ad dexteram Patris,' which is probably the
true reading, is an evidence of the Creed's antiquity and is
perfectly consistent with the belief that it was a product of

the epoch of the Nestorian controversy. Dr. Heurtley a
says, with reference to it have in this ancient form

:
'
We
a significant indication of the antiquity of the document in
1
Thus it is particularly mentioned by St. Cyril in his third Epistle to
Nestorius, rpir/fiepos ave/3'tai ai(v\evaas rov aSijv, Epistle to and in his
Successus and elsewhere. Caelestine I in his Epistle to Juvenalis and other
'
Eastern bishops uses the words Christi, qui pro nobis natus et passus est,
:
qui reseratis inferis et morte devicta pro nobis die tertio restirrexit.' Migne,
Patrol. Lat. torn. 1. p. 467. It will be observed that Caelestine, like the
Athanasian Creed, passes over in silence the crucifixion and death of otir
blessed Lord, and mentions only His descent into hell, and resurrection,
using the word inferi. Capreolus Bishop of Carthage, in his reply to two
Spaniards, Vitalis and Constantius, who had applied to him for a correct
exposition of the Catholic Faith respecting two distinctive tenets of Nes-
torianism, viz. hominem purum natum fuisse de Virgine,' and hominem purum
' '
pependisse in cruce comprehensum,' asserts that at no time, not even in His

descent to hell, was the Godhead severed from the manhood in our Lord's
Person ;
insists on this point at some length.
and he '
An dicimus Deum in
suscepto hornine etiam apud inferos non fuisse?' and '
Hoc omnino testificans
ac demonstrans Deum cuius maiestate plena stint omnia quodam incomprehen-
sibili utique et inexplicabili modo etiam inferis interesse . . .
ipse in homine est
visitare dignatus inferorum abstrusa.' Epist. ad Vitalem el Consiantium ;
Migne, Patrol. Latina, torn. liii. pp. 851-853. It will be noticed that
Capreolus also uses the word inferi : in fact he uses it no less than seven times,
infer mini or infermis never.
2
Pamphlet on the Athanasian Creed, p. 25.
"] The Date. 371
which it is incorporated, an indication analogous to that

which would be furnished by the occurrence of the remains
of some extinct animal in a geological formation of disputed
age.' This form appears in all ancient Confessions of Faith,

in the Apostles' Creed, as found in the works of Rufinus
and St. Ambrose and St. Augustine and Fulgentius and
Faustus and Facundus, in the Creeds of St. Cyril of
Jerusalem, and of Constantinople, and of the Nestorians.
The form 'ad dexteram Dei Patris omnipotentis' was not
introduced into the Apostles' Creed until the sixth century,
l
according to the scholar just quoted My reasons for .
' '
considering ad dexteram Patris to be the true reading

in the Quicunque that which proceeded from the hand
of the author I propose to state in the chapter on the
text.
'
In verse 38 the expression '

cum
corporibus suis calls
for careful consideration, as our translation 'with their
'
bodies is an adequate representation of the
scarcely
meaning, which clearly implies not merely the doctrine of
the resurrection of the body, but the more particular
application of it so much insisted on by Bishop Pearson 2

3
viz. that each individual will rise again hereafter in the

same body wherein he has lived and died here. We
might expect that this pointwould not be passed over by
the Creed if it was drawn up at the period to which we
have referred it, because the subject had been brought
before the attention of theologians very distinctly not
many years the controversy between St.
previously in
Jerome and Rufinus, the former accusing the latter of
denying with Origen the identity of the risen body, the
1
See Heurtley's Harmania Symbolica, p. 138; also Hahn, Bibliothek der
Symbols.
2
Exposition of the Creed, Art. XI.
B b 2
latter repudiating the charge 1

I have already stated that .
thoroughly Augustinian, a mode of

' '
resurgere habent is
expression of which abundant instances may be found in

the works of the great Western doctor. Verse 39,
'
Et
qui,' &c., is obviously constructed from St. John v. 29 and
St. Matt. xxv. 41 and 46.
It may be objected that to cite, as I have done, Eastern
writers, St. Cyril and Theodoret for instance, as supplying
internal evidence of the date of an unquestionably Western
1 '
St. Jerome, in his Epistle to Pammachius, says Uncle et omnes sic :
speramus resnrgere ex mortuis sicut Ille resurrexit. Non in aliis quibusdam

peregrinis et in alienis corporibus quae assumuntur in phantasmate, sed sicut
ipse in illo corpora, quod apud nos in sancto sepulcro conditum resurrexit, ita
et nos in ipsis corporibus quibus mine circumdamur et in quibus sepelimnr,
eadem ratione et visione speramus resurgere.' And again Alia ratione :

'
resurreclionem corporum confitemnr eorumque quae in sepulcris posita sunt

dilapsaque in cineres, Pauli, Pauli, et Petri, Petri, et singula singulorum ;
neque enim fas est, ut in aliis corporibus animae peccaverint, in aliis tor-
queantnr, nee iusti iudicis alia corpora pro Christo sanguinem fundere, et alia
coronari.' Rufinus, on the other hand. Commentarius in Symbohim> 43,
also maintains the identity of 'the risen body Et ita fit, ut unicuique animae
:
'
non confustim aut extraneum corpus, sed suum quod habuerat reparetur, ut
consequenter possit pro agonibtis praesentis vitae cum anima sua caro vel
pudica coronari vel impudica puniri. Et ideo satis caute fidem Symboli
"
Ecclesia nostra docet quae in eo quod a caeteris traditur, Carnis resurrec-
"
tionem," uno addito pronomine tradidit, huius carnis resurrectionem," huius
sine dubio, quam habet is qui profitetur, signaculo crucis fronti imposito quo ;
sciat unusquisqne fidelmm, carnem snam, si mundam servaverit a peccato,

futuram esse vas honoris, utile Domino ad omne opus bonum paratum, si vero
contaminatam in peccatis, futuram esse vas irae ad interitum.' Rufini Com-
mentaries in Symbolum. We might suppose that the author of the Athanasian
Creed had before him these passages of St. Jerome and Rufinus, especially if
the right reading is in corporibus suis.' That this is the reading of the
'
Ambrosian MS., the earliest MS. it will be remembered extant of the Creed,
I can affirm from my own knowledge, having collated the MS. myself. Water-
resurgere habent aim corporibus suis ct desunt in Cod.

'
land in the assertion,
Ambros.' {Critical History of the Athanasian Creed, p. 188; Oxford edition,
1870) has been misled by Muratori's inaccurate edition of the Creed from this
MS. It reads not omnes homines reddituri,' &c. as the text is given by
'
Muratori, Anecdota, vol. ii. p. 225, but 'omnes homines resurgere habent in
corporibus suis et reddituri,' &c. All other MSS. however, to the best of my
knowledge, read
'
cum corporibus suis.'
"] The Date. 373
document, is irrelevant. But in the first place it must be

remembered that in the fifth century the border line
between Eastern and Western Christendom was not sharply

and broadly defined, as it was at a later period intercourse ;
between the two was then constant and uninterrupted, the

bond of unity and then, although the Nestorian
unbroken ;
controversy originated in the East and raged with the

greatest violence there, and although the leaders on each
side were Easterns, still it attracted the attention and
awakened the lively interest of the whole of Western
Christendom. was the burning question of the clay, and
It
theologians of Italy and Gaul felt that the point at issue

between the Bishops of Constantinople and Alexandria
was one which touched vitally the common Catholic Faith.
There is abundant evidence of this. Several epistles are
extant both of Caelestine I and his successor in the
popedom, Xystus III on the subject addressed to St. Cyril
and Nestorius and different Eastern prelates. Early in the
controversy a Synod was held at Rome, and Cassian, at

the time a monk at Marseilles, upon the request of Leo
then Archdeacon of Rome, afterwards its illustrious Bishop,
wrote a treatise on the Incarnation in refutation of the
nascent heresy. Probably he was selected for this work
because he was by birth an Oriental, and had passed his
early life in the East and had been a pupil and disciple of
St.Chrysostom, by whom he was ordained to the diaconate,
so that he must have been thoroughly conversant with
Greek theology and the Greek language. The Council of
Ephesus was attended by legates from Rome and St. Au- ;
gustine was summoned to take part in its deliberations,

no doubt as the most distinguished doctor of the West,
but he died before the assembling of the Synod. Capreolus,
Bishop of Carthage, was also cited to the Council, but was

374 Conclusions.
unable to attend. A Western theologian, Marius Mercator,

was residing at Constantinople when
the controversy was
at its height, and took an active part in the discussions, not
only writing himself, but translating into Latin several of

tKe most important documents which were produced on
the great question of the day. St. Vincent of Lerins in
his first Commonitoritnn, which must have been written in
433 A D- - or 434) tne second being dated in the latter year,

dwells particularly upon the heresy of Nestorius. More-
over, shortly before the rise of Nestorianism, opinions of
a very similar nature were broached by Leporius a monk
and priest of Gaul, and attracted much attention both in
that country and Africa. He was brought to a conviction
of his error by St. Augustine, and upon his restoration to
the Church drew up a Confession of Faith, entitled 'Libellus
Satisfactionis.'
CHAPTER III.
AUTHORSHIP.
HAVING arrived at the conclusion that the Athanasian

Creed was drawn up at some time during the Nestorian
controversy not indeed when the controversy was at its
height, but whilst it the chief topic of thought and
was still
interest among theologians we are enabled, if not to

determine with certainty the authorship of the document,
at any rate to form an opinion of a high degree of proba-
bility upon the subject. The inquiry is necessarily hemmed
in by certain conditions. The Quicunqtie being of Latin
origin, the author must have been a Latin theologian a.s :
it was composed in the Nestorian epoch and reflects the

tone of thought then prevalent among the orthodox, lie
must have been a person who lived at that epoch and was
conversant with its theology as it re-echoes in all its parts
:
\
the teaching of St. Augustine both in substance and i
language, he must have been familiar with the writings of I
that great doctor. And if in any writer who fulfils these ;
conditions we can find any further

special traces of identity
or similarity in thought or language with the Creed, clearly
they will serve as guide-posts in our search.
In England the deservedly respected authority of Water-
land has caused the Quicunque to be generally regarded as
the work of Hilary of Aries. St. Hilary, who was Bishop
Conclusions. CH.
376 [
of Aries from 429 until his death in 449, was probably

conversant with the writings of St. Augustine and the
Nestorian controversy, but we have no positive proof of
the fact, the only work of his at present extant, with the
exception of a very short Epistle to Eucherius, being a

sermon on the life of his predecessor in the abbacy of
Lerins and the bishopric of Aries, St. Honoratus a work
necessarily of an unpolemical and undogmatic character,
and therefore incapable of supplying any such proof.
Waterland's arguments respecting the authorship are not
convincing. The passage quoted by him from Hilary's
sermon contains too slight a resemblance of expression
with the Creed to be made the basis of his argument
1
.
His only other attempt to produce special proof completely

breaks down on examination. Among the works of Hilary
mentioned by his biographer is a Symboli expositio '
ambienda,' which Waterland identifies with the Athanasian

Creed, his only authority for doing so being that it is
'
described by a similar title Expositio Symboli Aposto-
lorum.' or rather 'Anastasii Expositio Symboli Apostolo-
rum
'
in a Bodleian MS. of the fifteenth century 2
. A MS.
of the fifteenth century is adduced to prove the meaning of
an expression used in the fifth century. But apart from
3
this, as I have before ventured to point out Waterland was ,
misinformed respecting this Bodleian MS. Laud Misc. '
'
493 which is assigned by Mr. Coxe's Catalogue to the
Hilary thus apostrophizes Honoratus

1 '
St. :
Quotidianus in sincerissimis
tractatibus confessionis Patris ac Filii ac Spiritus Sancti testis fuisti nee facile :
tarn exerte, tarn lucide quisquam cle Divinitatis Trinitate disseruit, cum earn
personis distingueres, et gloriae aeternitate ac maiestate sociares.' S. Hilarii

Arelatensis, Scnno de vita S. Honorati, apucl Migne, Patrol. Lat. torn. i.
p. 1272.
2
Waterland, Critical History of the Athanasian Creed, pp. 81, 90, 164;
"
The Early History of the Athanasian Creed, pp. 81-84.
Authorship. 377
end of the thirteenth century, and is erroneously described

as containing a comment on the three Creeds by Hugh
and Richard of St. Victor, the comment which it contains
being that of Alexander Hales. It belonged originally to

the Carthusians at Mayence, as appears by notes on the
first and the last pages. In this codex the Qiiictmq2ie is
'
Symbolum Anastasii,' once Sym-
'
several times entitled
bolum Athanasii.' The title Expositio Symboli Apos-
'
'
tolorum is not as describing the Athanasian

found in it,
Creed, but the comment upon the Apostles'. And the

' '
titleExpositio Symboli Anastasii is used in reference to
the comment upon the Qnicunque. That of Anastasii '
'
Expositio Symboli Apostolorum appears only on the

flyleaf in a list by a modern hand.
of contents written
Hence no doubt Waterland's error. His informant must
have been misled by this list of contents, which was
obviously drawn up, as too commonly happens, upon a
very superficial examination of the MS. My information
on the subject is the result of my own inspection of the
book. Nor is it possible to acquiesce in Waterland's
'
Expositio Symboli ambienda of

'
hypothesis that the

St. Hilary was the Athanasian Creed. What it was is
a matter not far to seek. No doubt it was an Exposition
or Commentary on the Apostles' Creed, which was
'
commonly described as Symbolum/ probably addressed

to catechumens previous to baptism. Of such Expositions
by the Fathers we have abundant examples. Several are
to be found among the sermons of St. Augustine.
Three other Latin theologians of the Nestorian epoch
have been already mentioned, whose writings bear abundant
evidence of familiarity with the controversy of their age,
for they took an active part in it themselves Cassian,
Marius Mercator, and St. Vincent of Lerins. The second
Conclusions. CH.
378
of these must also have been familiar with the writings of

St. Augustine, if he was, as is generally supposed, the same
Mercator to whom one of the great doctor's Epistles having
reference to the Pelagian controversy was addressed. St.
Augustine speaks of him as his son, from which.it may

be concluded that he was a pupil and disciple of that
Father, if not his child in the Faith *.
Probably too
Cassian was well acquainted with the writings of St.
Augustine. But for any actual evidence of familiarity
with those writings in identity or similarity of thought or
language we may search in vain in the works both of
Cassian and Mercator.
But such evidence is found in the Commonitorium of
St. Vincent. We see it in the following instances :
St. Vincent of Lerins. St. Aiigustine.

' '
Ecclesia Catholica ... in Christo In Christo dtiae sunt substantial,
. .duas substanlias sed imam credit
. Dens et homo, sed una persona,
esse personam duas substantias quia
;
ut Trinitas maneat, non accidente
mutabile non est Verbum, ut ipsum homine quaternitas fiat.' Ser, cxxx. 3.
verteretur in carnem"; tma/n personam,
ne duos profitendo filios, quaterni-
tatem videatur colere, non Trini-
taiem! Commonitorium, i. cap. xiii.
'
Umis
idemque Christus, untts
'
Utrumque imus . . . sed
idemque Filius Dei, et unius eiusdem- propter Verbum, aliud propter homi-
que Christ! et Filii Dei una persona, nem , units Dei Filius, idemque
. .
sicut inhomine aliud ca.ro, et alhid hominis filius.' Enchiridion, cap.

anima, sed tmus idemque homo anima xxxv.
'
et caro.' Ibid. Ut quemadmodum est una per-
sona qnilibet homo, anima rationalis
et caro, ita sit Christus una persona,
Verbum et homo.' Ibid. cap. xxxvi.
'
Sicut enirn units est homo anima
rationalis et caro, ita ^mus est Christus
Deus et homo.' In Joh. Tract.
Ixxviii. 3.
S. Aug. Liber de Octo Dulcitii Quaestionilnts, Quaest. iii. sec. 2.

in.] Authorship. 379
'
Idem Patri et aequalis et minor! Deus est Verbum Mediator Deus
'
Ibid. ethomo, Deus aequalis Patri, homo

minor Patre. Est ergo et aequalis et
minor.' Ser. cccxli. cap. v.
'Idem ex Patre ante saecula genitus, 'Dominus noster lestis Christus,

idem in sacctilo ex Matre generatus.' Deus ante omnia saecula, et homo in
Ibid. nostro saeculo, Deus de Patre, homo
de Virgine, unus tamen atque idem
Dominus et Salvator lesus Christus.'
In Joh. Tract, xiv. i. See also En-
chiridion, cap. xxxvi.
'
Ambas generationes Christi et ex
Deo Patre sine tempore et ex hornine
matre in plenitudine temporis.' Con.
Maximinum II, xviii. i.
Est in Christo Verbum, anima et Verbum, anima
' '
Christus est et
caro', sed hoc totum unus est Christus.' caro? Ser. cccv. 2.
Ibid.
'
Unus non corrnptibili nescio qua Idem Deus qui homo et qtii Deus
'
divinitatis et humanitatis confusione, idem homo, non confztsione naturae,

sed integra et singular! quadam imitate sed unitate personae? Ser. clxxxvi.
'
personae. Ibid.
The comparison of the above sets of quotations, drawn

respectively from St. Vincent of Lerins and St. Augustine,
leads inevitably to the conclusion that the former was
thoroughly acquainted with the doctrinal terminology of

the latter, we may say even that he assimilated and
adopted it. Thus in St. Vincent the three conditions meet,

which we have been led to regard as pre-requisites in any
person to whom the authorship of the Athanasian Creed
can be assigned with any degree of probability. And he
is the only person in whom they can be proved to meet.
He lived and flourished at the period of the Nestorian
controversy, for he was thoroughly

he died A.D. 450 ;
conversant with that controversy, as appears plainly from

his Commonitorium, and he was familiar with the writings
of St. Augustine, a disciple of his school as far as regards

the great verities of the Faith. But we are able to advance
a step further, and find distinct traces of a connexion
Conchisions. CH.
380 [<
between the Quicunque and the Commonitorium in several

remarkable coincidences of doctrinal terminology and
idiomatic expression occurring in the two documents.
The first verbal coincidence to which I desire to draw
attention is in the words perfecttis Deus, perfectus homo^
which are found in both documents. It is remarkable that
the copula should be omitted in both, especially as it is
not omitted in the same phrase as used in the Union-
Creed of the Antiochenes, and by St. Cyril and St.
Athanasius, from whence, and not from any Latin source,

it
appears to have been derived.
Still more remarkable is the coincidence, which occurs
in the passages of the two documents, relating to the two

Nativities of our blessed Lord :
'
idem ex Patre ante
'
saecula genitus, idem in saeculo ex matre generatus in

the Commonitoritim, Deus ex substantia Patris ante
'
saecula genitus, homo ex substantia matris in saeculo

'
natus in the Creed. Similar contrasts between the two
Nativities are frequent in Confessions of Faith and the
writings of the Fathers, but most rarely do we find the
Nativity of our Lord in the flesh described in the manner

it is described in both these cases, as taking place in
saeculo, I believe I am right in saying that there is but
one other instance of this known. Thus the Union-Creed

of the. Antiochenes has, TT/SO atcoycoy \&v e/c TOV irarpbs
yevvriOevTa Kara Ti]V OeorrjTa, e?r' ecrxarcoy 8e T&V 7]p,pu>v TOV

amov 'bi rjfJ-as Kal Sia rrjv rj^repav o~a)Tiip[av K Maptas rrjs
TrapOevov Kara TT\V avOpwTTOTrjTa : and so also the Definition

of Chalcedon. St. Cyril uses a somewhat different
phraseology :
yevvr\Qvra \jikv 6etK<3s 77/30
iravTos al&vos KOI
Xpovov, ev eo-)(arots 6e TOV al&vos Kaipois TOV avrov Kara (rdpKa

K yvvaiKos
l
. To turn to Latin Confessions of Faith con-
1
Quod wins sit Christus.
in
.] Authorship. 381
taining some note of date in reference to the Incarnation

the Creed of Damasus has 'ultimo tempore,' that of
(
Bachiarius '
in novissimis diebus,' that of Pelagius in fine
Leporius known
'
saeculorum,' that of as his Libellus
'
Satisfactionis drawn up about 436 A. D. 'novissimo
tempore,' that of the fourth Council of Toledo A.D. 633

'ultimo tempore,' though it uses the same term as the
Commonitorium and the Qiticunque in reference to the
first Nativity
'
ante saecula genitus,' and the Anathe-
649 have
'
matisms of the Lateran Council A. D. ante
'
omnia saecula natus in reference to the first Nativity,
' '
but in ultimis saeculorum in reference to the second.

St. Augustine in reference to the two Nativities twice
' '
has respectively
'
sine tempore and in tempore/ also
temporalis V
'
'
aeterna and '
Once he approaches very
near to the terminology of our documents Deus ante :
'
omnia saecula, homo in nostro saeculo V The only

instance of in saeculo being used in reference to the second
Nativity, so far as I know, occurs in Fulgentius, who was

made Bishop of Ruspe in Africa A.D. 507: Unus atque '
idem Deus, Dei Filius, natus ante saecula et natus in

3
saeculo .'
These two verbal coincidences are not accidental, nor
yet such as might be accounted for by the common use

of Catholic phraseology. exclude, as in the highest
They
degree improbable, if not impossible, the hypothesis that
the two documents in which they appear could have been
drawn up by different authors independently one of
another, the earlier of the two being unknown to the
author of the later. It seems to me also improbable,
though in a less degree, that two such peculiarities should
n, and
1
Sermones, cxl. 2 ;
also cxc. cap. ccclxxx. 2.
-
Enchiridion, cap. xxxv.
3
De Fide Liber, cap. ii. sec. n.
have been copied from one document to the other. The

only alternative remaining is that both documents were
by the same hand, that the author of the Commonitorium
was also the author of the Athanasian Creed.
But as this conclusion rests only on a probable proof,
let us see whether it is confirmed by any other identities
or resemblances of thought or expression. Let the two
subjoined sets of parallelisms be considered :
Athanasian Creed. Commonitorium primum.

'
Fides aiitem Catholica haec est,
'
Ecclesia Catholica . . . et ttnam
ut unum Deum in Trinilate et Trini- Divinitatem in Trinitatis plenitu-
tatem in Unitate veneremur :
neque dine et Trinilatis aeqtialitatem in
confimdentes personas neque substan- una atque eadem maiestate veneratur
'
'
tiam scparantes (verses 3, 4). (cap. xiii).
Also : Umun Deum in Trinitatis
plenitudine et item Trinitatis aequali-
tatem in una Divinitate veneratur ;
ut neque singularitas substantiae per-
sonarttm confundat proprietatem,
neque item Trinitatis distinctio Uni-
'
tatem separet Deitatis (cap. xvi).
{ '
Alia est enim persona Patris, alia Quia scilicet alia est persona
Filii, alia Spiritus Sancti : sed Patris Patris, alia Filii, alia Spiriltis
et Filii et Spirittts Sancti una est Sancti: sed tamen Patris et Filii et
Divinilas, aequalis gloria, coaeterna Spirittis Sancti non alia et alia, sed
'
maiestas' (verses 5, 6). una eademque natura (cap. xiii).
I have marked by italics the words occurring in both

documents. In the first set of parallelisms both documents
present the same cast of sentence, the same thoughts and

principles, and some sameness of phraseology. The verbal
conformity is more close and obvious in the second.
The following may also be considered :
Creed. Commonitorium primum.

'
Est ergo fides recta, ut credamus
'
Ecclesia Catholica et de Deo et de
et confiteamur, quia Dominus noster Salvatore recta sentiens' (cap. xiii).
lesus Christus, Dei Filius, Deus pari- '
Ecclesia Catholica unum Chris- . . .
ter et homo est' (ver. 28). turn lesum, non

eundemque duos,
Detim pariter atque hominem con-
fitetur' (cap. xiii).
Authorship. 383
The expression
'
Deus pariter
occurring in et homo '
both is
especially deserving of notice, as being unusual.
So far as I can ascertain, it is not used by St. Augustine,
though he has several times Deus et homo,' nor is it to
'
be found in St. Hilary or St. Leo. There can be little
doubt that pariter was in the original text of the Quicunqite^
though omitted generally by later MSS., as also in the

it is
texts of the Roman and Sarum Breviaries, and was passed

over by the author of our own version.
Creed. Commonitorhim primum.

Deus ex substantia Pain's ...
'
'In uno eoclemque Christo duae
homo ex substantia mains' (ver. 29). substantiae sunt ; sed una divina,
altera humana ; una ex Patre Deo,
altera ex matre Virgine ; . . ^^na .
consulistantialis Patri, altera consub-

stantialis matri ; unus tamen idemque
'
Christus in utraque sttbstantia (cap.
xiii).
homo ex anirna Perfectus homo. ... In homine
' '
Also Perfectus
:
'
rationali et humana came subsistens plena humanitas. Plena, inquam,
(ver. 30). quae animam simul habeat et carnem,
seel carnem, veram, nostram, mater-
nam, animam vero intellectu prae-
'
ditam, mente ac ratione pollentem
(cap. xiii).
'
Unus idemque
Petrus, unus idem-
que Paulus, ex duplici diversaque
subsistens animi corporisque natura'
(cap. xiii).
The word siibsistens in this passage of the Creed,

defining our Lord's humanity, is particularly notable,
because it was evidently a favourite and common word
of St. Vincent's, who uses it three times within a short
compass in the Commonitoriitm. In the passage quoted

above he employs it in a similar connexion to that which
it has in the Creed ;
for he is illustrating the Unity of our
Lord's Person by the analogous unity belonging to any
human individual notwithstanding his complex constitution
of the diverse elements of body and soul. What makes

the use of this word in the Creed more remarkable and
seems to identify it more clearly as coming from St.
Vincent, is that a different word is found in Marius
Mercator's translation of the very similar passage pre-
viously quoted in the Symbol of Theodore of Mopsuestia,

'
hominem natura perfectum, ex anima rationali et humana
carne compositzun' Another person would have copied
this literally ; Vincent, we may presume, prefers his own
word.
It is observable also that the author of the Commoni-
torimn is most explicit and emphatic in his assertion of
our Lord's perfect humanity as regards both His soul and
body. The man who thus expressed himself would not
be unlikely in a doctrinal formulary to adopt the
equivalent, but more concise and conventional, terms of
St.Augustine, with whose writings, as we have seen, he
was well acquainted the terms which are found in the
parallel passage of the Creed. And this probability
gains strength when it is considered how largely the
terminology of the Quicunque is borrowed from the great

Latin doctor.
Lastly :
Creed. Commonitorium priimtm.

'
Unus autem, non conversions '
Unam personam . . .
quia muta-
Divinitatis in carnem, sett adsnmp- bile non est Verbum Dei ut ipsum
tione Immanitatis in Deum" (ver.
1
verteretur in carnem'' (cap. xiii).
33). Also :
'
Verbum Deus absque ulla
sui conversions non confundenclo,
. . .
non imitando factus est homo, sed

subsislendo in se perfecti hominis
. . .
'
snscipiendo natttram (cap. xiv).
obvious to remark that these parallelisms regarded

It is
collectively possess a force and significance which would

not belong to them singly and severally.
,.] Authorship. 385
There are other parallelisms, which seem to have arisen

from both documents being drawn from a common source
the writings of St. Augustine. These require distinct
consideration, as furnishing distinct trace of oneness of

authorship.
Creed. Commonitoriunt primum.
'
Aeq^lalis Patri secundum Di-oi- In uno eodemque Christo duae
'
nitatem, minor Patre secundum huma- sulstantiae sunt sed una divina, :
'
nitatem (ver. 31). altera humana, . . . una co-aeterna
aequalis Patri, altera ex tempore et
minor Patre. . . Non alter Christus .
Deus, alter homo, . . . non alter
aequalis Patri, alter minor Patre,

, sed unus idemque Christus Deus
. .
et homo . . . idem Patri et aequalis

'
et minor (cap. xiii).
We
can scarcely fail to trace the common source of
the two documents here in the following passages of
'
St. Aequalem Patri secundum Divinitatem,
Augustine :
minorem autem Patre secundum carnem, hoc est secundum

hominem V Also, Minor Patre, quia homo aequalis
'
:
autem Patri, quia Deus 2 .'
Again :
Creed. Commonitorium primum,

'
Unus omnino, non confusione sub-
'
Umis autem non corruptibili nescio
stantiae, sed imitate personae'' (ver. qua divinitatis et humanitatis con-
34). fusione sed integra et singular! qua-
darn unitate personae.'
'
Altera substantia divinitatis, altera
'
humanitatis (cap. xiii).
In this case even more plainly than in the former the

language of St. Augustine is the common source of both :
Idem Deus qui homo, qui Deus idem homo, non con-
'
et
fusione naturae, sed unitate personae V The man who

1
Epist. cxxxvii. cap. iii.
2
Serm. cclxiv. 4. See also Enchiridion, lib. i.
cap. xxxv.
3
Serm. clxxxvi. i.
C c
averred, as St. Vincent did, that in our Lord are two

substantiae divinitas and humanitas would clearly not
be unlikely to substitute substantiae for the naturae of
St. Augustine. And the former word in the Creed is
obviously the equivalent of divinitatis and humanitatis
v
in the Commonitorium. Unus in the Creed seems to

be drawn from the Commonitorium> and omnino is the
summary of St. Augustine's Idem Dens qui homo> et qui

Deus idem homo. Thus there are evident traces here of
the same hand in the Creed and Commonitorium.
Thirdly:
Creed, Commonitorntm primum.
'
Nam sictit anima rationalis et '
Altera substantia divinitatis, altera
caro units est homo, ita Deiis et homo humanitatis ; sed tamen deltas et
wins cst Christus* (ver. 35). kumanitas non alter et alter, sed ttnus
idemque Chrislus. ; . . . sicut in

homine aliud caro et aliud anima,
sed ^^n^ls idemque homo anima et
'
caro (cap. xiii).
Here again the common source may be found in St.
Augustine, to wit :
'
Sicut enim unus est homo anima
rationalis et caro ;
sic unus est Christus Deus et homo V
Clearly the verse in the Creed is nothing but this passage
with some transposition of words. The parallel language
of Vincent would also appear to be drawn from it and
founded upon it, some expressions being introduced with
immediate reference to Nestorianism. Hence it is a
probable conclusion that it was by his hand that these
words of St. Augustine were transferred to the Qiiictmque.
And further, between the Commonitorium and the
Athanasian Creed there exists, not only an accordance
of particularthoughts and expressions, but they are
pervaded by a unity of fundamental principle. Does
1
Tract, injoh. Evangelitim, Ixxviii. 3.
in.] Aiithorship. 387
very necessary that the

'
St. Vincent assert, that it is
course of prophetic and apostolic interpretation should

be guided in accordance with the rule of Ecclesiastical
and Catholic doctrine : in the bosom of the Catholic
Church also we should be specially careful to hold that
'
which has been believed everywhere, always and by all :
adding, 'This will be attained if we follow universality,

'
antiquity, consent ? Does he interpret St. a

Paul's charge
to Timothy that he should guard the deposit as meaning
'
Keep the talent of the Catholic Faith undefiled and

undiminished : that which has been committed to thee,
take heed that it abide with thee, that it be handed on
2 '
by Does he declare the unchangeableness of

thee ?
'
Christian dogma It is lawful that those ancient dogmas
:
of the heavenly philosophy should in process of time be
expounded with greater accuracy, refinement, elegance ;
but unlawful that they be altered, mangled, mutilated

it is :
they may admit of being set forth with greater clearness,

lucidity, distinctness, but they must needs retain their
'
3
fullness, their antiquity, their ? Does he maintain
essence
the necessity of accepting and teaching the Catholic
'
Faith : It remains that all understand in like manner,
as these moral precepts, so also the admonitions which
1 '
Multnm necesse est ut propheticae et apostolicae interpretationis linea
secundum Ecclesiastic! et Catholic! sensns normam dirigatur. In ipsa item
Catholica Ecclesia magnopere curandum est ut id teneanms quod ubique quod
semper quod ab omnibus creditum est.' . . .
'
Hoc ita clemum net si sequamur
universitatem, antiquitatem, consensionem.' S. Vincentii, Commonitorium,
i. 2.
2 '
atstodi, Catholicae fidei talentum in-
'
Depositum inquit,' i. e. S. Paulu?,
violatum illibatumque conserva. Quod tibi creditum, hoc penes te maneat,

hoc a te tradatnr.' Ibid. i. 22.
3 '
Fas est ut prisca ilia caelestis philosophiae dogmata pvocessu temporis
excurentur, limentur, poliantur sed nefas est ut commutentur, detruncentur,
;
mutilentur. Accipiant licet evidentiam, lucem, distinctionem sed retineant ;
necesse plenitudinem, antiquitatem, proprietatem.' Ibid. i. 23.
C C 2
have been given respecting the Faith, and, as it is

permitted to none to provoke or to envy another, so to
none is it permitted to receive what is contrary to the
gospel taught by the Catholic Church and To preach '
:
'
to Catholic Christians anything contrary to that which
they have received, never has been, never is, and never
will be permissible, and to anathematize those who preach
anything contrary to that which has been once received

'
never has been, never is, and never will be wrong and :
'
Thisthe proper duty of Catholics, to keep the deposits
is
of the holy Fathers and the things committed to them,

to condemn profane novelties, and as the Apostle said
and again said 1 If any one preach unto you what is
,
contrary to that which has been received, let him be

anathema 2 ? The principles thus enunciated underlie the
'
Athanasian Creed, which expresses the great verities of

the Catholic Faith, as held and taught by the Fathers,
and that for the most part in the very terms which they
employed. In particular, it is plain from these utterances
of St. Vincent of Lerins that the condemnatory clauses
are not alien from his mind .and might be attributed to
him without any improbability.
There
nothing in the early history of the Athana-
is
sian Creed inconsistent with the hypothesis that it was
1
Gal. i. 8, 9.
2 '
mornm mandata, ita etiam ilia quae de fide canta
Restat ut sicut haec
sunt, omnes modo
comprehendant, et sicut nemini licet invicem. provocare
pari
aut invidere invicem, ita nemini liceat praeter id, quod Ecclesia Catholica
'
evangelizat, accipere.' Also, Anrrantiare Christianis Catholicis aliquid

praeter id, quod accepenmt, nunquam nunquam licebit
licuit, nnnquam licet, ;
et anathematizare eos, qui annuntiant aliquid praeterquam quod semel
acceptum est, nunquam non oportuit, nunquam non oportet, nunquam non
'
oportebit.' S. Vincenlii, Cominonitoritim, i.
9. And, Catholicorum hoc pro-
prium deposita sanctorum patrum et commissa servare, damnare profanas
novitates, et sicut dixit atque praedixit Apostolus., si
qnis annunciaverit praeter-
quam quod acceptum sit anathema sit.' S. Vincentii, Commonitorium, i.
24.
Ill
.] Authorship. 389
composed by St. Vincent : on the contrary, there is much

which supports this view. That Father was a Gaul and
a monk of the celebrated monastery of Lerins, which was
situated in an island not far from the coast of Provence,
opposite Cannes the school which reared St. Hilary and

St. Caesarius and Virgilius, all three bishops of Aries, and
Lupus of Troyes. If Lerins was the birthplace of the

Creed, we should expect to find that it was first received
and used in Gaul and the North of Italy. And this we
have every reason to believe was the case. An early and
important MS. of the Quicunque the Vatican MS. Pal.
574 appears to have issued originally from this monastery,
a document relating to an incident in its history being
another of the contents of the volume. The earliest extant
MS. of our Creed that in the Ambrosian Library at

Milan is written in an Irish hand, and before it was
transferred to present domicile in the beginning of the
its
seventeenth century it belonged to the monastery of

Bobbio in North Italy, which was founded by the Irish
Saint Columbanus. The Creed is also found in another
Irish MS.
book of hymns deposited in the Church of
a
the Franciscans on the Merchants' Quay, Dublin, and
written, in the judgement of Bishop Reeves, not later than
A.D. uoo. These facts appear to indicate that the
Quicimque was known to the ancient Irish Church, which
it from Gaul, where as we have
in all probability received
seen it was accepted at an early period : for Ireland was in
close communication with Gaul, and, there can be little

doubt, derived from that country her Christianity and
Episcopate. And according to Mabillon the ancient Irish
Church was largely indebted not only to Gaul but to
Lerins itself for her ritual ;
for he states that the Cursus
Ecclesiasticus or the ordinary service as distinct from that
of the Eucharist, which obtained in the monasteries of

Marseilles and Lerins, and which he describes as the
Alexandrine to discriminate it from the other families of
1
the Cursus, passed into Ireland . St. Patrick is said to
have visited Lerins and spent some time there 2 but the ,
tradition, though possibly true, does not appear to rest

upon any reliable evidence.
To sum up
the grounds upon which the authorship of
the Athanasian Creed may be attributed to St. Vincent of
Lerins he flourished at the epoch when from external
and internal evidence it appears to have emanated there ;
is no other writer of the same epoch to whom it can be

ascribed with any degree of probability between it and his ;
Commonitorium there exist several coincidences of phrase-

ology, which seem to indicate that both works were by the
same hand and the principles avowed by him, particularly
;
as to the necessity of holding the Catholic Faith, are such

as we
should expect to find in the author of the Qnictmque.
I do not venture
to assert that the evidence I have pro-
duced is conclusive and demonstrative. It is a case in
which we could scarcely look for such evidence. But
I think I may without exaggeration describe it as highly
probable : and this is no small matter, if Bishop Butler
was right in saying that to us probability is the
very
guide of life. It is not superfluous to add that of all the
authors to whom the Creed has been attributed, Vincent of

Lerins is the only one to whom it has been attributed with
any degree of probability. I have previously alluded to
the fact that the evidence alleged by Waterland for the
authorship of Hilary of Aries does not bear examination.
Mabillon, Disquisitio de Ctirsit Galticano, 3. See also Warren's Liturgy

and Ritual of the Celtic Church, p. 79.
2
Stokes, Ireland and the Celtic Church, pp. 48 and 170.
in
.] Authorship. 391
The same may be said of the hypothesis of Quesnel, which

1
ascribed the Creed to Vigilius Tapsensis and of the ,
theory broached "about five and twenty years ago by

Mr. Ffoulkes, which represented it as compiled by Paulinus
Archbishop of Aquileia in or a little before the year 800.
1
See Quesnelli, dissertatio II. de variis fidci libellis, xvi. It was first
printed in his edition of Leo's works. It is also printed in Galland's DC
vetustis Canonum Collectionibus dissertationum Sylloge, torn. i. p. 833 ; and in
Migne, Patrol. Latina, torn. Ivi. p. 1065. He was answered by Antelmi, who
ascribed the Quicunque to Vincent of Lerins in his treatise Nova de Symbolo
Athanasiano disquisitio, Paris, 1693, and also by the Ballerini, Observationes
in dissertationem II. Paschasii Questielli, iii. De auctore Symboli qui-
cunque, printed in their edition of Leo the Great. See Migne, torn. Ivi.
pp. 1071-1075. Also Galland's Sylloge, torn. i. pp. 845, 846,

CHAPTER IV.
TITLES.
IN the earliest MS. copy of the Athanasian Creed

extant Ambrosian Library, O. 212, of the eighth century
it has notitle. It is the same also in another very early
MS. which is placed about 800 A. D. or a little earlier

the Paris MS. Latin 4858. The same is the case with the
very interesting Psalter in the Paris MS. Latin 13159,
which certainly belongs to the age of Charlemagne, and in
all probability was executed between the years 795 an d
800 ; but in this instance the omission of the title is
devoid of any significance, as the leaf on which the Creed
commences has clearly been inserted in order to supply the
place of the original one, which must have been lost (with
possibly one or two more) in consequence of some injury
done to the book, and it is written in a different hand from
that found in the book generally. Hence we cannot be
certain whether or not the title was omitted originally 1 .
The earliest title applied to the Creed appears to have

been Fides Catholica. We have an instance of its being so
entitled as early as the sixth century in the Epistola
Canonica, if the Ballerini are right, as they probably are, in
1
See Part I. chap. iii.
5.
Titles. 393
1
thinking that that document refers to our Creed Further, .
it is so described in the headings of all the oldest Com-
mentaries. Thus the so-called Fortunatus Commentary in

the Oxford Bodleian MS. Junius 25 is headed
'
Expositio
in Fide Catholica,' and in the Paris Latin
1008, MS.
Expositio super Fidem Catholicam,' and in the two Paris
'
Latin MSS. 3826 and 17448 similarly, 'Expositio super

Fide Catholica/ where the mark of contraction over the final
e and a may have been omitted inadvertently, and in the
Milan MS. M. 79 it is headed Expositio Fidei Catholice '
Fortunati,' where no doubt the expositio is referred to as

the work of Fortunatus, not the Fides Catholica. Again,
the Paris Commentary is headed in the Paris Latin MS.
ioi2 3 'Fides Chatholica cum expositione.' Again, the
Troyes Commentary in the Troyes MS. 804,
is headed
'
Expositio Also the Commentary lately

fidei catholicae.'
edited by M. Cuissard from an Orleans MS., and believed
by him work headed '

to be the of Theodulf, is
Explanatio
fidei catholicae.' The Milan MS. already mentioned as
containing a copy of the Fortunatus Commentary contains
two other Commentaries on the Quicunque, each having the
same title, Expositio Fidei Catholice.' This same title is
'
also applied to two more Commentaries both distinct it

must be remembered from any previously mentioned
which are severally found in two Milanese MSS., T. 103 and
I. 152, both Milanese Liturgical books, written, as Dr.
2
Ceriani assured me, in Milan It is worth noting that
.
there is a uniformity of title in all the five Commentaries

in Milan MSS., the Creed being described in all simply as
1
See above, Part Also the Tractate of the Ballerini, De auctore
I. ii. i.
Symboli Qiticunqtie, among Editomm

Observationcs in Dissertationem II.
Paschasii Quesnelli printed in their edition of St. Leo, and Galland's Disser-
tationum Sylloge, torn. i.
2
See above, Part I. iv. 9 and 12.
'
Fides Catholica.' And this is continued in the headings
of Commentaries as late as the thirteenth century. Thus
the Stavelot Commentary is headed in the Paris Latin MS.
13020 of the twelfth century, Tractatus de Fide Catho- '
lica,' and Necham's Commentary in the Bodleian, late

thirteenth century MS., Auct. D. 2. 9, 'Expositio Fidei
Catholice a Magistro Alexandra edita.'

And not only in the headings of Commentaries, but in
other documents, we have evidence of the early applica-
'
'
tion of the title Fides Catholica to the Quicimque. It
was thus described by Theodulf Bishop of Orleans at the

end of the eighth or beginning of the ninth century, both in
his Capitula and in his Capitulare addressed to his clergy.
So also in the Catachesis Theotisca preserved in a Wolfen-

biittel of the middle of the ninth century 1
MS. So also .
in the heading of a Prayer to be said after the recital of

'
the Quicungue Oratio post Fidem Catholicam

'
which
occurs in the Paris Latin MS. 13388 of the ninth century,
a manual of devotion formerly the property of the Abbey
of St. Germain des Pres at Paris, where it was no doubt
used. And it is so described in the Utrecht Psalter,
which, though modern palaeography forbids us to regard
it like our ancestors as executed in the time of Gregory
the Great, may still be safely assigned to the first half of

the ninth century :
indeed, it is considered by Sir E. M.
Thompson to have been written
beginning of that at the
2
century and to be the exact copy of an older codex It .
is so described also in another Psalter of the ninth century
Parker 272, O. 5 3
- And this title was never dropped
entirely, in proof of which let me adduce three notable
1
See above, Part I. v. 3.
-
Handbook of Palaeography, by Sir E. M. Thompson, pp. 64 and 189.
3
Above, I. iii. 15.
iv.] Titles. 395
examples of its occurrence at a later date : first, the Vat.

MS. Reg. 12, a very beautiful and elaborately-executed
Psalter, not previously noticed by me, which must have
had, as is shown by several circumstances, the abbey at
Bury St. Edmund's
for its birthplace in the eleventh
century, probably the latter half; secondly, the magnificent

Cotton MS., Vesp. A. J, commonly called the Augustine
Psalter, from St. Augustine's, Canterbury, its former home :
the Te Deum and Athanasian Creed in this book, it must

be remembered, are by a hand of the eleventh century,
dating, as Wanley thought, about the time of the Norman
Conquest, and they are accompanied by an interlinear
Anglo-Saxon gloss ; but the preceding portion of the
book, including the Psalter and Canticles, belongs, in Sir
E. M. Thompson's judgement, to the early part of the
eighth century
1
and thirdly, Vat. 81, the only known
;
example, so far as I am aware, of a Greek and Latin
Psalter in which all the Canticles, including the Athanasian
Creed, are found in Greek as well as Latin. According to

my conjecture, which I only mention in the absence of any
authority, the last-mentioned MS. belongs to the thirteenth
2
or fourteenth century .
The extant instance of the Qnicnnque being

earliest
ascribed to St. Athanasius occurs in the Autun Canon
dating in or about the year 670, in which it is entitled,

'
'
Fides sancti Athanasi presolis as in the Angers Collec-
'
tion, or
'
episcopi as in the Herovall 3

The preface to the
.
Oratorian Commentary gives us reason to believe that it

was ascribed to his authorship even before that as early
probably as the commencement of the seventh century. It
1
See Fac-similes of the Palaeographical Society, vol. ii. plate 18.
2
For some account of this MS. see above, Part I. v. i, 4 e.
3
Above, I. ii. 2.
is so ascribed in the title applied to it in the Vat. MS. Pal.

'
'
574 Fides Catholica beati Atanasi episcopi where it
appears among documents which, according to the

certain
Ballerini, were collected together and annexed to the

collection of Canons, which they follow, in the eighth
century. We find it also so ascribed by the celebrated
Vienna Psalter believed to have been originally the pro-
'
perty of Charlemagne in the title, Fides Sancti Athanasii
episcopi Alexandrini.' From the commencement of the
ninth century downwards MSS. of our document are abun-
dant, and it is commonly ascribed by the title to Athanasius,
but with a great and remarkable variety of form. Thus
we meet with Fides chatolica sancti Atanasii episcopi
'
'
Alexandrine ecclesie in Paris Latin 1451 of the ninth

'
century, Fides Catholica Sancti Athanasii,' British Museum,

Addit. 18043 of the tenth century, 'Fides Catholica
sancti Athanasii episcopi' in the Bodleian MS., Rawlinson
163 of the eleventh century, and others similar also :
with Fides sancti Athanasii Alexandrini/ B. M. Cotton,

'
'
Galba A. xviii of the ninth century, Fides sancti
'
Athanasii in the Psalter of Charles the Bald of the

'
same century, '

Fides sancti Athanasii episcopi in Paris
Latin 3848 B, also of the same century, and the like also :
'
with ' Sermo Athanasii de fide in the Capitula of Hincmar,
A.D. 852 ;
Sermo Athanasii' in the Profession of Adalbert,
'
A.D. 871; 'Sermo Fidei Catholicae' in the Charge of

Riculfus, A.D. 889; 'Sermo Athanasii episcopi de Fide
'
Sanctae Trinitatis in the Articles of Regino at the com-
mencement of the tenth century, and in the Charge of
Ratherius about 960 A. D.; in all which cases the form is
'
doubtless derived from the (
admonitio synodalis or
Episcopal Visitation Articles current in France and Ger-

many in the ninth century, perhaps earlier also with :
IV Titles.
.] 397
'
Hymnus Athanasii de Fide Trinitatis' in the Salisbury

MS. 150 and B. M. Bib. Reg. 2. B. v, both of them
Psalters written inEngland in the tenth century also :
' '
Fides Catholica dicta a sancto Athanasio episcopo in
Paris Latin MSS. 2076 and 2341 of the tenth century, and
'
'
Fides Catholica edita a beato Athanasio episcopo in
Vat. 84, assigned by Vezzosi to the tenth century, and
' '
Fides Catholica quam sanctus Athanasius dictavit in
Vat. 82, of the same epoch probably. Ratramn, A, D. 868,
describes our document as '
Libellus de Fide quern edidit
. . . beatus Athanasius Alexandrinus episcopus V
The term Symbolum, as far as we know, was first applied
to the Quicunque in the latter part of the twelfth century.
It was thus used by Henry Abbot of Brunswick and John
Beleth at that epoch 2
Afterwards it grew into common
.
'
'
Symbolum Athanasii and the

use, particularly in the title
like, which appears in Breviaries. As it was applied by

Beleth in the twelfth century to the Athanasian in common
with the other Creeds, so in the thirteenth it was applied
by Alexander Hales, Joannes Januensis and Durandus, in
the fourteenth by Ludolphus Saxo but with this differ-
ence, that Beleth reckoned four Creeds, the Apostles', the
Athanasian, the Nicene and the Constantinopolitan the ;
others reckoned three only, the Apostles', the Athanasian,

and the Constantinopolitan, called by them, as by us, but
incorrectly, the Nicene. In the Roman Breviary and the
Benedictine the Quicunque is headed '
Symbolum S.
Athanasii,' in the Sarum '
Symbolum Athanasii,' in the

Ambrosian rite which is very remarkable it is simply
headed Symbolum V
'
1
Contra Graecorum Opposita, lib. ii.
cap. 3.
2
Above, Part I. i. 24 and 26.
3
Dictionary of Christian Antiquities, vol. ii.
p. 1753.
Waterland, following Sirmond, asserts that the Athana-

sian Creed is called Symbolum by Hincmar 1 But the .
document quoted by Hincmar in his work De Praedesti-

natione, which he attributes to Athanasius and describes
as Symbolum., is clearly not our Creed, but a Profession of
'
Faith, called
(
Fides Romanorum and '
Fides Romanae
Ecclesiae,' which has been very absurdly printed by Chifflet
2
as the ninth book of Vigilius de Trinitate It is possible .
that Hincmar may have confounded the 'Fides Romanorum'

with the Athanasian Creed not probable con-
;
but this is
sidering that he was thoroughly familiar with the latter, as

appears from the frequent quotations from it and applica-
tions of its language which he has made in his treatise
De una et non trina Deitate.
The title 'Fides' occurs in the Treves MS. 1001,
a Psalter of the ninth or tenth century : it is used also by
Honorius of Autun.
' '
Still more remarkable is the title Athanasius which is
found a glossed Psalter executed about A.D. 12,00,

in
originally the property of St. Peter's, Erfurt, now in the

British Museum, Addit. MSS. 10934. Possibly the Qui-
cimque may have been so called occasionally for the sake
of brevity.
'
The title
'
Psalmus Quicunque vult occurring about the
middle of the thirteenth century in the Constitutions of
Walter de Cantilupe, Bishop of Hereford, and Walter de
1 Oxford edition.
Critical History, chap. ii.
p. 28,
2
The passage in Hincmar is as follows :
'
Et Athanasius in Symbolo, dicens
se credere in Christum, praemissis aliis, assumptum in caelis, sedere in dextera
Patris, inde venturum iudicare et mortuos exspectamus, in huius morte et
sanguine remissionem peccatorum consecuturi.' De rraedestinatione^ cap. xxxv.
It is remarkable that in the ninth century Ratramn, as well as Hincmar,
quotes both the Fides Romanorum and the Athanasian Creed as works of
Athanasius.
IV Titles.
] 399
Kirkham, Bishop of Durham, is simply attributable to the

fact of its being said as a Psalm in the service of the
Church.
For a considerable period and in various countries our
document was ascribed to another person besides Atha-
nasius ;
viz. Anastasius. This ascription appears some-
times in the titles of the Creed and clearly calls for atten-
tion. The first instance known of it is mentioned by
Waterland as occurring in a MS. of the twelfth century,
written for Church use in Augsburg, in which the Creed is
described as
'
Fides Anastasii episcopi.' But probably it
was ascribed to Anastasius prior to the twelfth century,

for towards the close of that century Beleth speaks of the
belief in his authorship as by no means uncommon, though
1
erroneous This belief having once gained a footing,
.
another step necessarily followed. If Anastasius was the

author, he must needs be Pope Anastasius. Accordingly
in a MS. of the twelfth century the Creed is entitled
'
Fides Anastasii Papae/ and the initial note or gloss of the
same MS., which is a glossed Psalter, commences Hie '
beatus Anastasius liberum arbitrium posuit,' instead of

'
Hie beatus Athanasius, &c.,' as in other MSS. of the
same gloss or series of notes a very clear proof of the
2
belief of the writer in the authorship of Anastasius . The
thirteenth century added the crowning stone to the edifice.
Simon Tornacensis, who flourished early in that century,
in his Commentary distinctly asserts that the Creed was
drawn up by Pope Anastasius in a large assembly of
1 '
Ab Athanasio Patriarcha Alexandrine contra Arianos hereticos composi-
tum est, licet plerique eum Anastasium fnisse falso arbitrentur.' Beleth, de
divin. Ojfic. c. 40, quoted in a note in the Oxford edition of Waterland's
History.
2
See -Waterland's History of the Athanasian Creed, Oxford edition, pp. 54,
55 note : also above, I. iv. 8.
prelates,and he repeatedly attributes it to the same author-

ship, never to any other. His Commentary concludes with
'
the colophon Explicit feliciter expositio super symbolum
:
beati Anastasii.' In the Merton College MS. 208 of the

same century a glossed Psalter the initial note commences
with the same words as that in the twelfth century MS.
before mentioned, ascribing the Creed to Anastasius and ;
in the Laud MS. Misc. 493 of the end of the same century,
which contains the Commentaries of Alexander of Hales

on the three Creeds, Quicunque is several times
the
'
entitled Symbolum Anastasii,' once only and that in the
'
Commentary on the Nicene Creed Symbolum Athanasii.'

We have also the ascription to Pope Anastasius in the
curious title to a French version of the Quicunque recorded
in Montfaucon's Diatribe '
Ce chant fust S*. Anastaise
qui Apostoilles de Rome.' And this ascription to Anasta-

sius continued apparently as late as the early part of the
'
sixteenth century, judging from the title Fides Catholica
'
sancti Anastasii episcopi found in the Harleian MS. 2953,
a Psalter of that date originally the property of Charles,
the son of Conrad Peutinger of Augsburg. Nor was it
in Germany only, as Waterland appears to think, that the

Athanasian Creed was thus believed to be the work of
Anastasius and expressly attributed to him, but in France
and England also for Beleth and Simon of Tournay were
:
both theologians and doctors of Paris, men of note and

influence, and well acquainted with the opinions of the age
in which they lived; and Alexander of Hales, the Irrefra-
gable Doctor, though he spent much of his life in teaching

at Paris, was an Englishman by birth and the Merton ;
College MS. seems to have been executed in England.

It is not to be supposed that the belief and the ascription
we are referring to prevailed universally or even very

IV, Titles.
'.] 401
generally in these countries but that they should have ;
spread so widely and continued through so long a period

is a very remarkable circumstance. How did it arise ?
Waterland thinks, and I believe rightly, that the ascription
originated in the mistakes of copyists. We are in fact

able to trace the change from Athanasius to Anas t'asms
through two stages of error, of which we have exta'nt
examples. Thus in the Bodleian MS. of the eleventh
century, Canonici Patr. Lat. 88, the title of our Creed is
'
Fides Anathasii episcopi.' Every one is aware that the
transposition of words and letters is a fertile cause of error
in MSS. Here the change from the transposition
arises
of th and n. Next a copyist meeting with this Anathasii
inserts the letter the Cambridge
s before th : thus in
Corpus Christi MS., Parker 411. N.

10, assigned by the
late Mr. Bradshaw to the eleventh century, we find the
title
'
Fides sancti Anasthasii episcopi.' From Anasthasii
to the better known Anastasii the transition by the omission
of h is easy and natural.
It only remains to mention the titles of the Athanasian
Creed in our own English Prayer-Book. In the rubric
prefixed to it in the first Prayer-Book of Edward the
Sixth, in 1549, it was described as 'this Confession of our
'
Christian faith : and this continued until 1663, when it
was changed, as the result of the Savoy Conference, to the
'
form which has been retainecf ever since this Confession
of our Christian faith, commonly called the Creed of Saint

Athanasius.' Also in the rubric preceding the Apostles'
Creed, as altered by the Savoy Conference and retained ever

since, it is described as the Creed of Saint Athanasius.'
'
The titles ascribed to the Athanasian Creed at various

times form an essential feature in its history. The Balle-
rini conclude from the facts that in some early MSS. it
Dd
has no title and in others is entitled

'
Fides Catholica,' that
it was not ascribed to Athanasius by the author, but became
associated with his name in a subsequent epoch *. With
this conclusion we may well rest contented. There is no
positive evidence of the ascription to Athanasius being in
vogue before the seventh century ;
and it is inconceivable
that the author of the Creed, whether St. Vincent or any
other Latin theologian, should have put it out, as the
work of the great Greek Father, especially when he had
drawn the terminology largely from St. Augustine. More-
over this would be impossible, if the earliest title was
'
Fides Catholica,' as it was in all probability. Whether or
not it was first issued without any title must needs be
uncertain, because although the earliest extant MS., that
at Milan, and another very early one, Paris 4858, are
both without any title and were doubtless copied from still
earlier MSS., we cannot from thence conclude for certainty
that those earlier codices were likewise without title, still
less that the autograph was so. Probably, however, the

author drew up the document in the first instance simply
for use in his own community, or at the request of an
ecclesiastical superior, and in either case we might expect

he would abstain from prefixing a title and still more his
own name, especially if he was none other than St. Vincent
of Lerins, who describes himself as minimus omnium '
servorum Dei peregrinus V And if it was issued originally

without title, it would naturally soon attract to itself the
1 '
Athanasii itaqtie nomen non ab auctore initio adscriptum, sed posteriori
tempore inductum fuit ; xvnde tantum exemplaria et scriptores
posteriora
septimi, octavi, et noni saeculi illud praeferunt.' Observaliones in disserta-
tionem II. Paschasii Qucsnelli, iii. 3, De auctore Symboli
Quicunque. See
Gallandii, Dissertationum Sylloge, torn, i, p. 844. Also Migne, Patrol. Latina,
torn. Ivi. p. 1073.
3
Commonilorum fritmim, i.
IV Titles.
.] 403
title
'
Fides Catholica,' of which it was by its own pro-
fession an exposition and statement. Then, probably in
the latter part of the sixth century, as we should conclude
from the fact of its being ascribed in MSS. at the com-
mencement of the following century to Athanasius, the
name of that illustrious Father began to be used in con-
nexion with it. As to the immediate cause which led to
this we know nothing for certain we can only form con-
:
jectures, but it may be probable conjectures. In the judge-

ment of Waterland it was first spoken of as the Catholic
Faith or Faith of St. Athanasius simply as containing in
substance his doctrine, not from any belief that it was
1
actually his work
This was most likely the case, espe-
.
cially considering the circumstances of the latter part of

the sixth century. At that time the Catholics in the North
of Italy and South of France were brought face to face
with Arianism, which was the dominant faith of the Lom-
bards in the former country and of the Goths in the latter.
It was not a critical age, and they did not know, nor did
it concern them to inquire, who was the author of the
Creed, which they had received as the Catholic Faith.'
'
This they were assured of, that the truths taught by it

were the same for which Athanasius contended in opposi-
tion to Arius, which they also must maintain in opposition
to his followers. And when it had thus come to be spoken
of as the Faith of Athanasius, the exposition of his princi-
ples, the badge of fidelity to the truths of which he was the

most distinguished champion, the next step would follow
ere long the title would be understood to signify that the
formula was actually composed by him and be alleged
in evidence to that effect. The same process is observable
in the history of the Apostles' Creed, which no one now
1
Critical History, chap. viii.
Dd Z
would maintain to have been drawn up by the Apostles

themselves. For all that it is no forgery. Neither is the
Athanasian Creed a forgery because it is not really the
work of the man to whom long ages have ascribed it.
There is another way of accounting for the ascription of
our document to Athanasius. Possibly it may have been
the result of the ignorance or carelessness of copyists,
which were no doubt a fertile cause of the attribution of
works to a wrong authorship in the Middle Ages. Several
books or treatises in Latin on dogmatic subjects are extant,
which must have been ascribed to Athanasius considerably

before the ninth century, being quoted as his by two
writers of that age Theodulf and Hincmar. Their
genuineness is however with one exception- universally
denied by modern scholars. The cause of their being
originally thus ascribed to Athanasius, though not written

by him, is
patent, most of them being cast into the form of
a discussion between the great Catholic Doctor and a heretic.
Down to the latter half of the seventeenth century these
books continued to be considered the genuine productions
of Athanasius, and were so edited. In 1664 Chifflet col-
lected them all and edited them, as the work of Vigil ius
on the Trinity. But his grounds for so assigning them are
clearly insufficient ; and the bulk of them are attributed
in preference to Idatius Clarus by Montfaucon and the
1
Ballerini . In the Benedictine edition of St. Athanasius
one only the last in order in Chifflet's edition was re-
tained among his genuine works, the rest being relegated
1
See In libros de Trinitate admonitio in S. Athanasii Opera, Paris 1698,
torn. ii.
p. 601 also the tractate of the Ballerini, De aitctore Symboli Quicun-
;
que, v, under the head of Editorum observaliones in dissertationem II. P.'

Quesnelli, printed in the third volume of their edition of St. Leo Migne,
Patrol. Lcttina, torn. Ivi. pp. 1073, 1074 and in Galland's Dissertatiomim
Sylloge, torn. i.
p. 845.
IV Titles.
] 405
to the spurious list. What have these books to do with

our point ? In his work De Spiritti Sancto written in 809
Theodulf quotes the Athanasian Creed as the work of
Athanasius in conjunction with some of these books, which
suggests not indeed that it must, but it may have been
mixed up in his time with them in the MS. orMSS. which
he used 1
. And if this was the case, it may have led to
the connexion of the name of Athanasius with it in the first
instance. found the Quicttnqiie with the title

If a copyist
'
Fides Catholica simply or with no title at all following in

'
a MS. of some or one of these books ascribed to Athanasius,

he would very possibly assume that that also must belong
to his authorship, and would prefix his name accordingly.
Such assumptions are not uncommon. The erroneous
attribution onceintroduced would be easily multiplied
and propagated by other copyists.
These are two alternative possible ways of accounting
for the ascription to Athanasius. But nothing certain can
be determined upon the point. This is not to be wondered
at considering our ignorance of the remote period when
the circumstance occurred. Moreover, it is not a matter
of any practical importance. For the claims of the Creed
to our belief and esteem do not rest upon the fact of its
ascription to Athanasius^ but chiefly and primarily upon

excellence as a faithful exposition of the great
its intrinsic
scriptural and Catholic verities of the Trinity and Incar-

nation. This is especially pressed upon English Church-
men by the statement of the Article that the three '
1
The quotation of the Creed, from Pater a nitllo to dc Trinitate scntiat, is
headed Migne's edition, Patrol. Latina, torn. cv. p. 247 Item idem (In
in
Symbolo] quod Spiritiis Sanctus procedat a Patre et Filio. This might convey
the impression that the Creed was styled Symbolitm by Theodulf. Such, how-
ever, is not the case, in Sirmond's edition, of which Migne's is a reprint, the
words In Symbolo being printed in the margin the same as Scripture references.
406 Conclusions.
Creeds, Nicene Creed, Athanasius's Creed, and that which

is the Apostles' Creed, are most thoroughly
commonly called
to be received and believed for they may be proved by
:
the most certain warrant of Holy Scripture.' If we are to

'
reject the Confession of our Christian Faith commonly

called the Creed of St. Athanasius/ because it is not his
composition, upon the same
principle we must
reject also
'
that which is commonly called the Apostles' Creed.' And
it must fare the same with the Nicene Creed, as we incor-
rectly call the Creed recited in the Communion Service.

For it not identical with the Creed drawn up at the
is
Council of Nice, the former containing much important

matter which is not found in the latter and omitting
important matter which is found in the latter.
CHAPTER V.
THE TEXT,
CONSIDERING the very great number of MSS. of the

Athanasian Creed which are still extant, they present a
remarkably small diversity of text. There is but one
variant of any importance. This remark does not apply
to the Treves fragment, which, as I maintain for reasons
l
before stated a portion of a sermon delivered at the
,
is
'
Traditio Symboli,' not of our document.
There is no evidence to show that the Quicunque existed
at one time in a kind of embryo state and attained its
present form and dimensions by a process of growth and

accretions, like the other two Creeds and the Te Deum.
There is no evidence of its having been combined into one
from two separate documents, relating severally to the
Trinity and the Incarnation. The homogeneous character
of the two parts, as I have before pointed out, is a clear
indication of the contrary. Nor can it be proved that the
condemnatory clauses were subsequent additions to the
doctrinal expositions. We have every reason to believe
that such as the Creed is now, such it was when it issued
from the hands of its author.
In Appendix E. I have reproduced the text as printed
by Waterland, with collations made by me from early and
1
Above, Part I. chap. i.
4.
Conclusions. CH -
408 [
important MSS. ;
but there are some particulars which
seem to call for special notice.
In verses 7, 8, 9, 10, 13, 15, and 17 et is read before
Spiritus in most early MSS., but it is omitted in later

codices, as also in the printed Breviaries, Roman and
Sarum.
Verses 20, 21, 23, Pater a nulto . . . sed procedens. These
verses are the only portion of the Creed respecting which
there can be any question whether they belonged to the
original text. They are not quoted in the so-called Fortu-

natus and Troyes Commentaries. On the other hand, they
are found in all the MSS. and are quoted in the other
early Commentaries, including the Paris, which may be as

early as either the Troyes Commentary or the Fortunatus.
Possibly the two last-named documents may have omitted

to quote them, because their doctrinal teaching is in sub-
stance contained in their comments on the fourth verse.
The evidence therefore is in favour of the verses belonging

to the original text. The mere fact, moreover, of the
omission of a Commentary to notice a particular portion of
the document which is its subject-matter, is no proof of its
absence from the text. Itmay be added that the quotation

by Theodulf in his work De Spiritu Sancto of these im-
portant verses concerning the relations of the divine persons

together with some other verses of the Creed is alone
a sufficient proof that they could not have been inserted in
the Creed after or during the controversy respecting the
Procession which took place at the end of the eighth and
the beginning of the ninth century, but must have belonged
to it some considerable time before. For Theodulfs
treatise was written early in the ninth century before that
controversy had ceased. And the internal evidence, as

well as the external, excludes the notion of these verses
V .] The Text. 409
being subsequent additions. There is nothing as regards

doctrine or style to discriminate them from the rest of the
Creed, as the work of a later age or different hand. They

are perfectly homogeneous with the rest, being cast in the
same mould of Augustinian teaching and phraseology.
This is particularly true of the doctrine of the Procession
of the Holy Spirit from the Father and the Son, stated in
the twenty-second verse, which was repeatedly asserted by
St. Augustine for instance,: non tantum a Patre sed etc
a Filio procedere Spiritum Sanctum/ de Trin. iv. 29, and
Spiritus quoque Sanctus non sicut creatura, ex nihilo est

'
factus ;
sed sic a Patre Filioque procedit, ut nee a Filio nee
a Patre sit factus,' Ep. clxx. 4.
Verse 32. After the words sed procedens the Milan MS.
adds Patri et Filio co-aeternus est. sup- As the addition is
ported by no other MS. it can be of no significance, and I

should not deem it worth noticing but for the strange
inference drawn from itby Professor Lumby in his History
of the three Creeds, a book which has obtained a wide
circulation, especially among young theological students.
'
In his judgement the addition is of such a character as to
stamp this MS. with a date posterior to the great con-

troversy on the Procession of the Holy Ghost. It is an
expansion and affirmation of the preceding portion of the

verse which could hardly be expected before that con-
troversy had excited a considerable degree of attention,
that is at the end of the eighth or beginning of the ninth
1
century This is indeed an astonishing argument, espe-
.'
cially from such a quarter ! How could an assertion of

the doctrine of the co-eternity of the Holy Spirit with the
Father and the Son be an expansion and affirmation of
the doctrine of the Procession of the Holy Spirit from the
1
Chap. v. p. 218.
4io Conclusions. [CH.
Father and the Son, seeing that the two doctrines are
perfectly distinct the one from the other The position is
?
clearly untenable ; and the conclusion built upon

if it falls,
it must fall too. And further, the insertion of the words in
question in this MS. is easily accounted for. Therein the

Athanasian Creed is preceded by the Liber de dogmatibus
'
'
ecclesiasticis commonly attributed to Gennadius, and by
the '
Bachiarii Fides,' and it is followed, though not imme-
'
by the Damasi Fides erroneously headed Hiero-

' '
diately,
nymi Fides.' In all these three Confessions of Faith after
the respective statements respecting the Procession of the
Holy Spirit, there are found the words Patri et Filio

co-aeternus. The scribe being thus made familiar with
them very naturally added them in the other Confession,
comprised in his book, to the clause relating to the Holy

Spirit. It is almost unnecessary to remark that these
Confessions were all prior in date to the eighth century,
' '
the
'
Bachiarii Fides and '
Damasi Fides considerably so.
The co-eternity of the Holy Spirit with the Father and the
Son was repeatedly affirmed long before that epoch in
opposition to the Arian and Macedonian heresies, particu-
larly by St. Augustine. Its affirmation therefore in this
copy of the Qiiicunque cannot afford the slightest ground

for assigning it to a subsequent date.
Verse 25. Unitas in Trinitate et Trinitas in unitate.
This is the later reading and is found in Breviaries. Earlier
MSS. generally have Trinitas in unitate et unitas in
Trinitate^ as may be seen by reference to the collations in
Appendix E.
Verse 28. Detis pariter et homo. This is the reading of
Milan O. 212, the Paris MSS. 3848 B, 2076 and 2341,
British Museum MSS. Bib. Reg. 2. B.V. and Cotton Galba
A. xviii, Vat. Palat 574, Bodleian Canonici Patr. Lat. 88,
v.] The Text. 411
Parker 272 O. 5, and Salisbury 150. It was also originally

the reading of Paris 13159 and Parker 391, but in both
pariter has been erased, and in Palat. 574 there has been
an attempt to erase The same erasure appears in the
it.
Lambeth MS. 427, a Psalter written in England and
assigned to the ninth century. The word is found in the
quotations of the verse in aH the earlier Commentaries,

the Fortunatus so-called, the Troyes, the Paris, and the
Oratorian. Considering this together with the fact of its
being found in almost all the earlier MSS., it appears
clearly to have belonged to the original text. It is a word
upon which special stress -seems to have been laid in con-

nexion with the doctrine of the Incarnation at the time of
the Nestorian controversy, and hence is a confirmatory
indication that the Quicunque is the product of that epoch.
Thus St. Vincent of Lerins in his Commonitorium, sec.
first
xiii :
'
Ecclesia Catholica et de Deo et de Salvatore nostro
recta sentiens . . unum Christum lesum, non duos, eun-
.
demque Deum pariter atque hominem confitetur.' And

St. Cyril's Apologeticus pro duodecim capitibiis in the con-
temporary Latin translation by Marius Mercator represents

'
'
Orthodoxus as saying in reference to the Tenth Anathe-
matism :
'
Cur non magis unum eundemque et Deum esse
dicunt et hominem, ut omnia sint ipsius et divina pariter
'
et humana 1 ? Also St. Cyril's Scholia de Incarnations

Unigeniti according to Marius Mercator's translation, cap.
Discernere cupientes quid sit tandem incarnatum
'
xiii :
esse ethominem factum Dei Verbum, cernimus quod non

hoc est hominem assumere tanquam in coniunctione, . . .
magis autem fieri iuxta nos hominem (ita tamen ut nulla

conversio vel commutatio subsequatur) et sublevare pariter
cum sua natura eum, qui in adsumptione fuit carnis et
1
Migne, Patrol. Latina, torn, xlviii. 959.
Conclusions. CH.
412 [
sanguinis dispensative V The Deus pariter et homo of ' '
the Creed precisely corresponds with the expression re-
peatedly used by St. Cyril, eos 6/ôu KO! avOpuTros, so that
the former might be a translation of the latter. It only

remains to add that pariter is generally omitted in later
MSS. and in Breviaries.
Verse 33. Units autem, non conversione Divinitatis in

carnem^ sed assnmptione httmanitatis in Deum. By reference
to the collations of the text in Appendix E, it will be seen
that the early MSS. generally read in came and in Deo
instead of in carnem and in Deiim which are found in the
received text. The Vatican MS. however, Palat. 574,
likewise an early MS., being of the ninth century, has the

latter readings, of course -in the usual abbreviated forms in
carne and in dm and that these were the original readings
;
is shown in a very marked manner by the fact of an attempt
having been made to change the m in dm into 0. The

evidence of this codex I venture to consider specially
valuable on account apparent connexion with
of its
2
Lerins . These readings are also found in the St. Gallen
MS. they are also the
27, a Psalter of the ninth century ;
readings of the Oratorian Commentary according to the

Vatican MS. from which it is edited by Mai, but the
Troyes MS. has in carne and in Deo : the text, however, of
that Commentary in the former codex is clearly preferable
to that of the latter The Bouhier Commentary has in
3
.
carnem in Troyes 1979, the earliest of the three MSS.

from which I have printed it, in carne in the two others,
Troyes 1532 and B. M. Addit. 24902 ;

in all three it has
4
in Detiin . The so-called Fortunatus Commentary has in
carne and in Deo I believe in all MSS., and they are the
1
Migne, Patrol, Latiiia, torn, xlviii. p. 1016.
2 3 *
See Part I. iii. 12. See Appendix H. See Appendix I.
V .] The Text. 413
readings also of the Paris Commentary they are supported

:
by the Troyes Commentary, which has non con-

'
too
versione Divinitatis "in came neque humanitatis in Divini-
tate.' Down to the eleventh century the same readings
occur in most MSS. But subsequently in carnem and in
Deiim became usual ;
in Breviaries, manuscript and printed,
I believe they are always found.
The readings in came and in Deo are clearly an im-
portant variation, affecting the sense. It is necessary to
consider whether or not they should be regarded as the
true readings which issued from the hand of the author.
1
They were not so esteemed by Waterland although he was ,
unacquainted with the Vatican MS. Palat. 574. I venture

to submit that he was right, that that MS. and the St.
Gallen codex have preserved for us the true readings.
I think so, firstly, because in carnem and in Deiim are in
accordance with the doctrinal terminology of St. Augustine,

which is followed generally in the Creed secondly, because :
they are also in accordance with the terminology prevalent

at the epoch when was produced and
in all probability it ;
lastly, because they yield incomparably the best and most

meaning. In support of my first reason let me
intelligible
adduce the following passages from the writings of the
great Latin Father: 'Verbum caro factum est, a Divinitate
carne suscepta, non in carnem Divinitate mutata.' Encliir.
l
cap. xxxiv. 10. In unitatem personae Unigeniti assnmptus

3
est homo. Tractatiis in loan. Evan. Ixxiv. 3. '

Dei Filius
factus est hominis films, assitmptione inferioris, non conver-
sione potions, accipiendo quod non erat, non amittendo
5
quod erat. Ser. clxxxvi. cap. u. Passages to the same

effect may be found in Ser. clxxxvii. cap. iii, Enchir.
cap. xxxvi, and Epis. cxlix. 7. Secondly, precisely similar
1
See his note in loco.
to this phraseology was that used by the Catholics in con-

tending against Nestorius. Thus St. Vincent of Lerins :
'
Mutabile non est Verbum Dei ut ipsum verteretur in
Deus Verbum
'
carnetn ;
and '
Absit ut . . . . . .
personam
hominis suscepisse credatur, sed ita potius ut incommu-
tabili sua manente substantia, et in se perfecti hominis
suscipiendo naturam ipse caro, ipse homo . . . existeret.'
Commonitorium, 14. i.
13 and
Cyril specially What St.
upon was the Unity of Christ's Person that the
'
insisted
Logos from God the Father hypostatically,' i. e. in Person,

'united Himself with human nature, 'and with flesh,' i.e.
that which has become His own flesh is one Christ, the
same Person, as is clear, at oace God and man V The
oneness of Christ was not the effect of a conversion of the
Godhead into flesh for in vindicating himself from the
:
charge of Apollinarianism brought against him more than

once by Nestorius, he repeatedly and emphatically dis-
claimed the teaching of any such doctrine 2 Rather it .
rested upon this ground, that the Word became partaker '
of flesh and blood . . . and came forth man from woman,

not having cast away the Divine essence and the generation
from God the Father, but even in the assumption of flesh
continuing to be what He was
3
Such was the union of .'
the two natures that, although they retained their several

in Christ in a wonderful manner
'
distinctive properties,
ica.0' v-irocfraaiv rjvSiiaOai r&v IK Qeou Harper, eVo re eZVeu Xpiffrtii'
TTJS iSias ffapicos,

rbv avrbv Srj\ovori Qeov 6[ji.ov /cat avQpoJitov. The words of his
second Anathematism.
2
For instance : Ovre . . .
TTJV aapica (jiap.lv ety Oeurrjros rpatrrjvai <pvaiv, ovre
:
(trjv aapicos els (pvfftv TT)V diropprjToi' eov Aoyov Trapavex^ n vai <f>vffiv, arpetrTos
jap effn KOI dva\\oia)Tos. S. Cyrilli ad Nestorium tertia Epistola. He

denies, it be observed, the change of the Divine nature <rapic<Js <=ls <j>vffiv.
will
3
St. Cyril's second Epistle to Nestoritis, afterwards sanctioned by the
Council of Ephesus. lie uses the words Iv irpoahrji/jet ffapicos, of which

adsumptione huutanitatis in the Creed might be a translation.
v.] The Text. 415
beyond the power of the human mind to conceive they

were brought together into oneness without confusion and
change
1
.' And with still greater definiteness St. Cyril
speaks of the grace and dignity conferred upon the flesh or
nature of man by the Incarnation, that it has passed up '
'
into the glory of the Godhead and become the flesh of
!
God V
Such being the Catholic terminology current during the
Nestorian controversy, it is impossible to doubt, that if the
Athanasian Creed was drawn up at that epoch, as I believe
to have been the case, the readings in carnem and in
Deum were from the hand of the author, especially it
might be added if he was none other than St. Vincent of
Lerins. They distinctly re-echo that phraseology, and are

not less distinctly opposed, as might be proved at length, to
the Nestorian hypothesis. And thirdly, these readings yield
incomparably the best and most intelligible sense. Their

meaning is obvious. With them the verse formulates the
precious Catholic verity, taught, as we see, explicitly by
St. Augustine in opposition to Apollinarianism and St.
Cyril of Alexandria in opposition to Nestorianism, that in
the Person of His Only-begotten Son Almighty God has
vouchsafed to unite to Himself in a mysterious but real
manner the nature of man. Thus understood, it har-
monizes perfectly with the remaining portion of the Creed
relating to the Incarnation. On the other hand, it is
1
"Erepov fjev n ical trfpov Oeorrjs re icai ajfOpanruTrjs . . . dAA' ty kv Xpiarcu
tvojs re ical vnep vow tls
evoTTjra ffvvSf5pafj.r]icoTa avy-^yff^cas Sixa ical
S. Cyrilli Quod timis est Christus, edit. Pusey, 744 A.

2
Els 'yap Ki'ptos 'Ir/aovs Xpiaros . . . els rrjv rrjs OeorrjTos Suav d
avTou rfjs <rapKus. De recta fide ad Arcadiam Marinam, 78 b, and fj yap
et
aapg ffapg kan ical ov OSUTTJS, et ical yeyove Qeov ffap. Epist. ad Succcnsutn.
The latter passage is quoted in extenso by Hooker, Ecclesiastical Polity,
V. liii. 2.
difficultto perceive what doctrine precisely, what phase

of thought the readings in carne and in Deo in their literal
interpretation symbolize they jar, like a discordant note,

;
upon our sense of the fitting and appropriate. It is incon-

ceivable that the author, who in drawing up this Confession
of Faith was evidently careful, as he naturally would be, to

adhere closely to the dogmatic phraseology of approved
Catholic Doctors and Fathers, should in one particular, and
an important one, have allowed himself to diverge from it.
No doubt it is a sound rule of criticism that of two
readings the more difficult is likely, generally speaking, to
be the true one ;
but this can only hold within limits.
It may be argued that very improbable that the

it is
fitting and grammatical reading should have been changed

into the unfitting and ungrammatical reading. But a little
consideration will show, that in this instance
suffice to
such a change might have easily taken place, especially in
the sixth or seventh centuries. It must be remembered
that the words carnem and Deum would not be written in
full in MSS., but thus CARNE DM; the m in carnem

being represented by the mark of contraction over e, and
Deum written in an abbreviated form, which would also be
indicated by a mark
of contraction. It is by no means
unlikely that thesemarks of contraction might have been

omitted inadvertently by a copyist, such an occurrence
being far from uncommon. Another copyist finding CARNE
and DM would be tempted to substitute O for M in the
latter word in order to make

it harmonize with the former,
adding the mark of contraction (manifestly omitted) over it.

Such a change would be more readily made in the sixth
and seventh centuries, as falling in with the corrupt
Latinity of the age'; and for the same reason the error
would be multiplied and propagated with greater facility.
v.] The Text. 417
Verse 36. Ad inferos. This is in my belief the true
reading. For my reasons for so thinking see above, Part II.
chap. pp. 368, 369 note.

ii.
Tertia die resurrexit. By reference to the collations in
Appendix E, it will be seen that several of the earliest

MSS. omit tertia die and some read surrexit. Probably
therefore siirrexit simply was the original reading.
Verse 37. Ad dexteram Patris. It will be seen on
reference to Appendix E that all the MSS. from which
I have produced collations, with three exceptions, read
ad dexteram Dei Patris omnipotentis. The three exceptions
are Paris 4858, Milan O. 212, and Vat. Palat. 574. The
first of these cannot be adduced as a witness for either
reading, because it contains only the commencement of

the Creed down to the words
'
non tres aeterni.' The
second Milan O. 212, the oldest MS. extant, it must be
remembered, of the Creed, and a transcript from a yet
earlierdocument, reads ad dexteram Patris. The third
exception Vat. Palat. 574, which evidently in the
is first
instance had the same reading but above Patris ;

has
been written Dei, obviously by the same hand which
has made other additions and some erasures and at ;
the foot of the page the following note indicating an

omission appears omnipotentis, Inde veuturus iudicare
vivos et mortuos. The words are not in the original text,
from Inde to mortiios being clearly omitted through in-
advertence. The omission of omnipotentis from the original
text could not have been accidental, any more than that
of Dei.
And the evidence in support of ad dexteram Patns, as
the original reading, does not rest on these two MSS.
only, inasmuch as it is referred to, I may say quoted,

as part of the text by all the earliest Commentaries
li c
upon it, the Fortunatus so-called, the Troyes, the Paris, the
Oratorian and the Bouhier. This is remarkable, and would
alone dispose us to regard it as the earlier and therefore the
true reading, since we have been led to the conclusion
that these .Commentaries were compiled prior to the close
of the eighth century, the date of the oldest MS. which has
the alternative reading ad, dexteram Dei Patris omni-
potentis. But I do not rest my case upon this alone. It

has been previously mentioned * that the latter form was
first introduced into Confessions of Faith in the sixth
century, the former being usual previously. The former

therefore is without doubt the most ancient of the two, the
source from which the latter grew and it is in the highest :
degree improbable that the compiler of the Athanasian

Creed should have adopted the latter in the fifth century,
to which, as we have seen, both external and internal
evidence points as the epoch of its composition. Still
further, as theevidence of the Milan and Palatine MSS.

and of the quotations in the earlier Commentaries proves
that ad dexteram Patris was the reading during some con-
siderable period preceding the ninth century, there is no
room for proceeded originally from the hand
doubt that it
of the author. For, supposing for an instant that the other

reading ad dexteram Dei Patris omnipotentis was the
original one, how could
have been changed to ad dexteram
it
Patris'? Is it likely that a copyist would leave out the

words Dei and omnipote7itis in his transcript, if he found them
in the MS. from which he copied ? On the other hand,
their insertion may be easily accounted for, inasmuch as after
they had been admitted generally into the Apostles' Creed

say at the end of the seventh century or the beginning
of the eighth copyists would be likely to transfer them
1
Part II. chap. ii.
v.] The Text. 419
from thence to the Athanasian Creed, in order to assimilate

the latter document with the former. The Palatine MS.
affords an example doubtless of the process by which the
insertion was often made. A corrector would write the
additional words between the lines above the original
reading or in the margin of the page. Another person

copying from this would adopt the words into the text.
Verse 38. It may be well to draw attention here to the
mentioned by me in the Appendix, that in Muratori's
fact,
collations of Milan O. 212 the words resurgere habent cum
corporibns sttis et are erroneously described as wanting. In
other particulars too his collations are inaccurate, and it is
surprising it should be so considering that he was the

Librarian at Milan ; probably he was indebted for the
collations to the hand of an assistant.
My collations were the result of two examinations of the

MS. at different visits.
The Milan MS. reads in for cum.
E e 2
CHAPTER VI.
RECEPTION AND USE.
THEQtiicimque milt has during the whole course of its

history been received in the Western Church as a Creed.
This is shown in the first place by the earliest titles
'
applied to it, Fides Catholica,' '

Fides Catholica Sancti
Athanasii,' or the like, or simply
'
Fides.' No Latin word
so accurately represents what we mean by a Creed as
'
'
Fides a formulated statement of truths necessary to be
believed. It would be superfluous to adduce examples of
its being so used. This also is shown by the fact that from
the twelfth century it has been very commonly entitled,
'
and particularly in Breviaries, Symbolum/ in such head-
ings as
'
Symbolum Athanasii.' In the Ambrosian rite,

'
as already mentioned, it is entitled simply Symbolum.'
Another and still more cogent evidence of the reception
of our document as a Creed is found in the judgement of
theologians who place it in the category of Creeds as ;
of Honorius of Autun at the beginning of the twelfth

century, who reckons four Creeds, the Apostles', the
x
Nicene, the Constantinopolitan, and the Athanasian of ;
Beleth at the end of the same century, who also reckons

being named second in order
2
four, the Athanasi-an ;
of
Alexander Hales, Joannes Januensis, Durandus in the
thirteenth, of Ludolphus Saxo at the beginning and
1 2
Above, I. i.
24. Above, I. i.
29.
Reception and Use. 421
Wyclif at the end of the fourteenth, or the author of the

Wycliffite Commentary, all of whom reckon three Creeds
1
only, the Apostles', "the Nicene, and the Athanasian . It is
perfectly true that it is also spoken of, though compara-

'
' ' ' ' 2
tively seldom, as sermo,' libellus,' hymnus,' psalmus ;
but there nothing in these terms inconsistent, as appears

is
to be sometimes thought, with the belief that our docu-

ment has been received by the Church as a Creed and
should be so received and regarded by us now. The first
( '
two, sermo and libellus,' are terms of wide application,

'
and each of them may be used of any brief writing, or

document, or formulary. In the Paris Bibliotheque
Nationale MS. of the eighth century, Latin 3836 the
same codex which contains the Treves fragment a Con-
'
fession of Faith is headed Eiusdem sermo 3 '

: and in
Rufinus' Commentary on the Apostles' Creed we find the

'
Creed itself referred to as sermo,' where after quoting
Ascendit ad caelos, sedet ad dexteram
'
the Articles,
Patris, inde venturus est iudicare vivos et mortuos,' the

commentator continues, 'Consequent! brevitate in fine
sermonis haec continentur'; and what is yet more remark-
able, in two instances single articles are so described,
thus :
'
In Ecclesiae Romanae symbolo non habetur addi-
tum, Descendit ad Infcrna, sed neque in Orientis Ecclesiis

habetur hie sermo,' and Ultimus sermo iste, qui Resurrec- '
tioncm carnis pronunciat, summam totius perfections suc-

cincta brevitate concludit if the Qnicimque was V And
'
'
entitled hymnus
'
psalmus,' because it was sung inand

the service of the Church as a hymn and psalm, it does not
1
Above, I. i. 31, 33, 34 and 35 ;
also I. iv. 24.
2
See chap. iv. in this Part.
Early History of the Athanasian Creed, by G. D. W. Ommanney,

3
p. 400.
4
De Fide et Symbolo, edidit Carolus A. Heurtley, Editio tertia, 1
884, pp. \
42,
153, 164.
Conchisions. CH.
422 [
follow that it was not at the same time esteemed as a

Creed. The latter term, viz. psalm, does not appear to
have been used in reference to it
prior to the thirteenth
century.
cannot refrain from adding the remark, that when
I
persons exclude the Athanasian Creed from the category

of Creeds on the ground that it never received the sanction
of an Oecumenical Council, they forget that by this hard
and fast rule they are equally excluding from the same
category the Apostles' Creed, and the Creed which we
recite in the Communion Service, now commonly, but
inaccurately, called the Nicene Creed.
The Quicunque being thus received as a Creed was used
in consequence twofold manner, as a formulary of
in a
faith, a confession before God with thanksgiving of the

Catholic Faith, especially as regards the great revealed
truths of the Trinity and Incarnation, which are its prin-
cipal subject-matter, and also as a formulary and instru-

ment of instruction in the same faith.
Of the first of these uses we possess abundant and
interesting evidence in a vast number of manuscript
Psalters written in all the principal countries of Western
Christendom at dates ranging from the close of the eighth
century to the end of the fifteenth, to which our document
is subjoined, together with the Canticles of the Old and
New Testaments wont to be said or sung in Divine service,
the Lord's Prayer and the two other Creeds being some-
times but not always added, the Te Deum always. And
the reason why it was thus subjoined to the Psalter
together with the* Canticles is obvious. It was together

with them recited in the worship of the Church. For it
must be borne in mind that these manuscript Psalters were
the devotional books of our Christian forefathers, and are
vi.
] Reception and Use. 423
therefore most interesting, real memorials of their worship,
they yet speak. Some of the earliest

in which, being dead,
and most important I have expressly referred to above l ,
probably at too great a length for the patience of many ;
I cannot say I have described them ;

and I have mentioned
what were the Canticles usually found in them. Another
thing to be borne in mind with respect to the ancient
manuscript Psalters now extant is that, numerous as they
are, they are but few compared with the whole number of
books of the same which once existed, the great bulk
class
of which have perished from a variety of causes decay,

neglect, damp, war, fire, ignorance, and fanaticism.
Concurrent with this evidence of the Psalters, there is
a wellnigh continuous testimony to the use of the Athana-

sian Creed in Divine worship in incidental historical notices,
in episcopal charges and admonitions and conciliar decrees,
enjoining its observance, and that under pain of canonical
censure in the event of disobedience 2 .
And, whenorder to avoid the great inconvenience of

in
using a multiplicity of books in the celebration of Divine

worship, the Breviary was constructed in which the various
Offices, with component elements of prayers and
all their
psalms and hymns and canticles and lessons, were arranged

in one book, our document was appropriated to the Office
for Prime the hour at which it had been recited previously.

This appears to have taken place in the eleventh century,
the close of which produced the earliest Breviary extant ;|
.
The precise date when the Athanasian Creed began to

be recited in Divine service cannot be determined with cer-
tainty. To argue from the fact of there being extant at

1
Part I. chap. iii.
2
See above, I. i. 17, 18, 19, 21, 24, 25, 28, 29, 31, 33; also I. ii. 3, 5, 6, 7,
10, II, 12.

3
Above, I. iii. 27.
424 Conclusions, [CH.
present no Psalters containing it earlier than the close of

the eighth century that it could not have been so recited
before that epoch would be very precarious, for this reason,
that,though there are no Psalters of an earlier date, so far
as we know, now existing, which contain it, still there may
have been and probably were many originally, which have
perished the course of time in the great wreck of ancient
in
documents, already alluded to. How very possible this is

we shall be better able to realize if we consider that a MS.
of the Quicunque of the eighth century, which was pre-
served at Paris so late as the last century, is now lost to
us 1 Moreover, the use of the Athanasian Creed in the
.
Church's worship was clearly not a new thing in the ninth

century and what was then such a general practice, at
;
least and Germany, could not have been the

in Gaul
instantaneous product of the age it is more likely to have :
been the result of a gradual growth and extension of the

use during a previous period of some duration. And there
are some indications of this. Florus the Deacon, writing
to Hyldrad the Abbot about A.D. 830, speaks of the in-
sertion of the Qtticimqite in Psalters as a long-established,
a
recognized usage The Utrecht Psalter, which contains
.
our document, is described by Sir E. M. Thompson as

'
written in the beginning of the ninth century,' and at
the same time by him to be an exact copy
'
is asserted
3
of an older codex At the time when the Oratorian
.'
Commentary was drawn up, i.e. about A.D. 700, the

Quiczmque was recited here and there in Churches, as we
know by the express statement of the Preface 4
. And this
guides us to fix the middle of the seventh century as the

1 2
Above, I. iii. 2. Above, I. i. 12.
3
Handbook of Palaeography, by Sir Edward Maunde Thompson, pp. 64
and 189.
* '
Illud fidei opusciilum, quod passim in ecclesiis recitatur.' See Appendix H.
vi.] Reception and Use. 425
latest period when the use of the Athanasian Creed in
Divine service could have commenced. For we can scarcely

suppose that it could have attained the measure of growth,
which we are thus led to believe that it did attain about
the year 700, in less than fifty years.
The service at which the Athanasian Creed was said was
invariably the Office of Prime, which was first introduced
into the West by Cassian, having been originally instituted
atBethlehem, but does not appear to have obtained a wide
and recognized use till the sixth century, when it was
adopted by Benedict in his Rule, and also observed by
Aurelian, a successor of Caesarius in the bishopric of
Aries. Hatto or Ahyto, Bishop of Basle about A. D. 827,
ordered that the Quicunque should be learnt by priests by

heart and recited on Sundays at Prime 1 In the early part .
of the tenth century recorded to have been sung at

it is
Prime daily by the brethren in the Church of St. Martin

at Tours 2 Honorius of Autun at the beginning and John
.
Beleth at the end of the twelfth century, Alexander Hales

in the first half of the thirteenth, Johannes Januensis late
in the thirteenth, and the Wyclirfite Commentary towards

the close of the fourteenth, all speak of it as being said at
Prime. The Breviaries in appointing it, as they did without
any variation, to be recited at the same hour, did but per-

petuate and stereotype the earlier practice.
But whilst there has been an unvarying uniformity of
practice as regards the Office at which the Quicunque was
said, no such uniformity found to have existed as regards
is
the frequency of its recital. In this respect considerable
diversity is observable, and that not only in diocesan and
parochial usage, but in monastic usage

First of its also.
secular use the Capitulum or Injunction of Bishop Hatto

1 2
Above, I. ii. 5. Above, I. i. 18.
Conclusions. CH.
426 [
or Ahyto of Basle, just mentioned, requiring the recitation

of our Creed on Sundays at Prime, is the earliest extant
enactment requiring its periodic recital in Divine service,
to the best of my knowledge. It is but a local and dio-
cesan capitulum, and we are unable to produce any similar-
enactments of the ninth century, but it cannot be assumed
that none others of a like kind ever existed : rather the
probability is capitula similar to

that other bishops made
that of Hatto, which have perished in the wreck of ancient
documents. The geologist who finds the remains of an
animal of an extinct species does not conclude that the
individual associated with them was the only one of the
species that ever lived ; rather he infers the probable

existence in a remote age of numerous individuals of the
'
same family. In the Admonitio synodalis antiqua the

'
' ' '
presbyter is enjoined to sing every day

'
omni die cantet
as learn by heart the Discourse of Athanasius con-
'
as well,
cerning the Faith of the Holy Trinity Y but as the words

'
'
omni die cantet are found in one only of the three forms
of this document printed by Baluze and do not appear in
'
Synodica of Ratherius I can scarcely suppose them

'
the 3
to have been inserted before the eleventh century, or at the

earliest the close of the tenth. Towards the close of the
eleventh century it would seem that daily recital was the
general but not universal practice for Udalricus, referring ;
apparently to secular Churches, says that in some

'
no
mention was made of the formula of the Faith written by
Athanasius, to wit Whosoever, except on Sundays alone,'
implying of course that the Churches where it was said on
Sundays only were exceptional, the general practice being
2
to say it daily This evidence may be understood to
.
1
See above, I. ii. 10 also Appendix B.
;
a '
Textus 'fidei scilicet Quicitnqtie a S. Athanasio conscriptus cuius non-
apply especially to Southern Germany, as Udalric was

prior of an abbey in the Black Forest, and wrote his book
at the request of Willelmus abbot of a monastery in the
same locality. Early in the twelfth century Honorius of
Autun affirms that the Catholic Church
'
repeats the Creed

Whosoever will daily at Prime, which Athanasius bishop
of Alexandria issued V And this distinct assertion that
daily recital was the general practice of the Church at that

time is confirmed by the fact of Abelard, who was a con-
temporary of Honorius, reproaching the Cistercians with
being guilty of an innovation by decreeing that the Creed
2
should be said on Sundays only .
Guyetus too states
3
that it was daily said in all ancient Breviaries
meaning ,
I presume Breviaries of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries.

But at the close of the latter century we find Johannes
Januensis averring that it was not said every day, but only
on Sundays and days of special solemnity ; and, as he
makes the statement expressly in reference to his own
4
time , may imply a previous use of greater
his language
frequency. Certainly under the Roman use in the early

part of the sixteenth century it was said on Sundays only,
as I conclude from a Roman Breviary printed at Venice in
1533, entitled
'
Breviarium Romanum completissimum,'
'
and another entitled
'
Breviarium Ritu romane curie and
'
described by the colophon as Officium approbatum a . . .
sanctissimo domino nostro Leone X. 151$, 8 idits novem-

bris in Castello Viterbii in camera sue residencie.' The
nullae ecclesiae nee meminerint nisi in sola Dominica.' Uclalricus, Cluniacenses

Consuetudines, lib. i. cap. iii; apud Migne, Patrol. Latina, torn, cxlix. p. 633.
1 2
Above, I. i. 24. Above, I. i. 25.
a
In omnibus antiquis Breviariis quotidie
'
dicebatur.' Heortologia, lib. iii.
cap. xix. Quest, v. de forma Primae.
1
Ideo mine non in singulis diebus dicuntur.'
'
He is
speaking of the
Nicene and Athanasian Creeds. See above, I. i. 33.
frequency therefore of recital would appear to have been

reduced at Rome sometime between that epoch and the
early part of the twelfth century, when it may be presumed
that daily recital was in use there as well as elsewhere.
Possibly, if I might hazard a conjecture, this reduction

was made by the shortened Breviary authorized by
Nicholas III, 1377-1380. If so, this would account for
Januensis stating in 1286 so emphatically that the Nicene

'
and Athanasian Creeds are now said not every day but
'
on days of special solemnity, when the Churches are most

frequented.The daily recital it is well known has always
been the use of the Milanese Church according to the
Ambrosian rite 1 Such also appears to have been the
.
general practice in England and Scotland, at any rate in

the centuries immediately preceding the Reformation, if
we may judge from the Sarum and York and Aberdeen
Breviaries. The point is put beyond doubt by the title in
Bishop Hilsey's Primer The Symbole or Crede of the:
'
great doctour Athanasius dayly red in the Church -.' So

too it was at Wiirzburg, as should gather from an early
I
printed Breviary in the Bodleian. With regard to its

modern use,by which I mean its use during the last three
centuries, in the Churches on the Continent, Bona in the
formerly it was sung daily

c
seventeenth century says that
'
at Prime which he alleges the authority of Honorius

for
but in his own time it was recited on Sundays only when '
the people were assembled in larger numbers V Grancolas,
writing in the eighteenth century, states that in his time it

was said only on Sundays in most Churches but it appears ;
1
See Dictionary of Christian Antiquities, vol. ii. p. 1753.
2
See a copy in the Bodleian, printed by John Wayland, 1539.
3 '
Olim quotidie acl Primarn cantabatnr, ut Honorius scribit, nunc diebns
tantum Dominicis congregata in unum maiori frequentia popnli recitatur.'
Bona, De divina Psalmodia, Paris 1663, p. 399.
to have been still said in some Churches daily, for he adds

l
that this was the case at Sens
These statements respecting .
the recital of the Qidcunque on Sundays must be under-

stood with a certain limitation, inasmuch as it is asserted
by Gavantus, who like Bona was a theologian of the seven-

teenth century he wrote in the first half of it that there
are some exceptions to the Sundays on which it is said,
that it is not said on the Sundays within the octaves of the
Nativity, the Epiphany, the Ascension and Corpus Christi,

nor yet on Easter Day and Whitsunday, because on these
the Dominical Office proper is not used 2 And this appears .
to be the rule of the Roman Breviary, which in all probability

Gavantus had before him :5
seems then that the practice
. It
of foreign Churches in general has been for the last three

centuries, and is now, to recite the Athanasian Creed on
Sundays with the above exceptions, consequently on most
Sundays in the year.
He're it may be most convenient to notice the Post-

Reformation use and reception of our Creed in the Church
of England. In thePrayer-Book of Edward VI, A.D.
first
1549, it was ordered to be sung or said on the Feasts of

Christmas, Epiphany, Easter, the Ascension, Pentecost and
Trinity Sunday. In the second Prayer-Book of Edward VI,
which was adopted only three years later in 1552, its
recital was required on these and other 1'easts also, viz.
St. Matthias, St. John Baptist, St. James, St. Bartholomew,
St. Matthew, St. Simon and St. Jude, and St. Andrew,
1 '
Maintenant on ne le dit plus que le Dimanche clans la plupart des
eglises.' Then after mentioning its daily recital by the Carthusians he con-
tinues :
'
On le dit aussi tous les jours a Sens.' Grancolas, La Liturgic De
r Office divin, Paris 1753, p. 333.
2
Gavanli, Thcsaiirus De Symbolo S. Athanasii, sec. v. cap. xix. torn. ii.
p. 167, edit. 1753.

3
Breviarium Rontanum Rnbncae generahs, xxxiii.
making thirteen days in the year altogether. And no

alteration as regards the days of its recital has been made
by any subsequent revision of the Prayer-Book. The
increased recital enjoined by the second book of Edward
is a very notable circumstance, considering that in other
particulars that book as compared with the first was an

evident departure from previous Catholic usage. It has
been accounted for by the fact that the excesses of the
Anabaptists and other fanatics, who had traversed the
country openly denying the essential doctrines of Chris-

tianity such as the Trinity and Incarnation, had alarmed
the minds of Archbishop Cranmer and the authorities of
the Church, and led them to attach a higher value to the
great Confession of the Faith, in which those doctrines are

most distinctly and explicitly enunciated.
In the rubrics of the first Book relating to the Apostles'
Creed and that of St. Athanasius there was an obvious
inconsistency, which was no doubt the result of haste or
inadvertence. After the Benedictus came the rubric,
'
Then shall be said daily through the year the prayers
following, as well at Evensong as at Mattins, all devoutly
kneeling.' The short Litany followed, and next the

rubric, 'Then the Minister say the Creed and the
shall
Lord's Prayer in English with a loud voice.' On the other

hand, the rubric preceding the Athanasian Creed ordered
that on certain feasts already mentioned it should 'be sung
or said immediately after Benedictus.' In the second
book some alterations were made apparently for the
purpose of removing this inconsistency. The Apostles'
Creed was printed immediately after the Jubilate, which
was inserted in this book as an alternative Canticle after
the Benedicts; and in the rubric preceding it the words
'
'
daily through the year were omitted it ran thus

'
Then :
shall be said the Creed by the Minister and the people

standing.' No alteration was made in the rubric pre-
ceding the Athanasian Creed beyond the insertion of the
additional feasts on which it was to be recited. Still
there remained a want of clearness and harmony in the

rubrics taken literally. This was completely rectified at
the last revision of the Prayer-Book in 1662, when to the
rubric before the Apostles' Creed was added except only
'
such days as the Creed of St. Athanasius is appointed to

be read,' and in that before the Athanasian Creed the
'
words '
immediately after Benedictus were altered to '

at
Morning Prayer instead of the Apostles' Creed.' No

doubt the alteration thus made by the Savoy revisers
was in accordance with the previously existing usage,
and was intended to give express confirmation and sanc-
tion to it.
No alteration, as has been already mentioned, was made

at the last revision in regard to the days appointed for the
recital of the Quicimque. But an alteration was then made
in its position in the book. Before, it was placed imme-
diately after the third Collect for Evensong and was
followed by rubric, the '
Thus
the Order of endeth
Morning and Evening Prayer throughout the whole year/
or the like. In 1662 it was printed, as it has been ever
since, separately after Evening Prayer, headed by the
words At Morning Prayer.'
'
must be borne in mind that the Church of England

It
since the Reformation has not only constantly maintained

the use of the Creed of St. Athanasius in her services, but
has accepted and authorized it in the most
emphatic and
explicit manner by declaring in the Thirty-nine Articles,
which were passed by Convocation finally in the year
1571, that together with the other two Creeds it 'ought
thoroughly to be received and believed.' In the Latin

version of the Articles, which is equally authentic with the
English, as both versions were submitted to Convocation,

'
it is entitled Symbolum,' the heading of the eighth
Article being
'
De tribus Symbolis/ and the three Creeds
'
being described as Symbola tria, Nicaenum, Athanasii,

et quod vulgo Apostolorum appellatur.'
To pass on to the monastic use of our Creed. It has
been already stated that we have the authority of an
ancient catalogue of the early abbots of Fleury on the
Loire for believing it to have been sung daily in that
important Benedictine abbey as early as the ninth cen-

tury
x
. And probably the practice was not peculiar to
that monastery. Martene in mentioning this refers also
to its use, apparently its daily use at Prime in two other
monasteries, St. Aper or St. Evre at Toul in Lorraine
and St. Denys. In these 'two instances he specifies no
dates ;
but it isnatural to presume that they are of some
antiquity, if not coeval with the first-named. Both are

2
derived from authoritative documents . The same writer
affirms that in the celebrated Church of St. Martin at
Tours also a Benedictine monastery the brethren re-
solved unanimously in the year 92,2, to sing the Quicunque
on festivals as well as ordinary days 3 But in a Breviary .
in accordance with the rites and customs of the Benedictine

Order, as observed at Monte Casino, including apparently
corrections from the rubrics of the Roman Breviary, de-
scribed as being decreedby a general Chapter of the Order in
1502 and confirmed by Pope Julius II in 1505, it is ordered
to be said only on Sundays at Prime, when the Dominical
1
Above, I. i. 11.
Martene, De antiquis monachorum
z
ritilms, lib. i.
cap. iv. p. 17, ed. 1788.
8
Above, I. i. 18.
Office is said 1
. And such seems to be the use of the
2
Order at present The Cluniacs, who originated in the
.
tenth century, recited the Athanasian Creed daily. So it

is expressly stated by Udalric, who wrote his account of
their customs at the close of the following century 3 And .
the fact supplies an additional argument in support of the
daily recitation of the Quicunque among the Benedictines

in the ninth century, if not earlier, inasmuch as the Cluniac
customs were not new institutions, but the observance or
4
revival of practices sanctioned by much earlier use . But
notwithstanding this ancient use of the Creed by the
Cluniacs, their modern Breviary omits it entirely
5
. A copy
of this book, printed at Paris in 1686, may be seen in the
Bodleian Library. It is entitled Breviarium monasticum '
sacri ordinis Cluniacensis iuxta regulam sancti Benedicti et

mentem Pauli V Pontificis Maximi.' There is a prefatory
statement by '
Emmanuel Theodosius a turre-Arverniae
1
The title of the book is Breviarium monasltcum sccundum rituin ct
morcm monachoruni ordinis sancli Benedicti de olscrvantia Casinensis con-
gregationis . .Deoetum capitiili generalis 1502 per Julium II. Pontiftcem

,
Maximum VI. Cal. Feb. confirmation : Correctionem a praedicto Augustino

de Venetiis factam de rubricis Brcviarii nostri approbantes, illam inscri
Brcviariis impresses et iiuprimendis omnino staluimus. It was printed at
Venice in 1550.
2
Breviarium monasticii/ii, &c. Mechliniae, 1871.
3
Textus ficlei, scilicet Quicunqne, a Sancto Athanasio, millo clie omittitnr,
'
ut non dicatur a nobis.' Antiquiores consuctitdines Cluniacensis monastcrii

collcctore Udalrico monacho Benedictino. See Migne, J'atrol. Lat. torn, cxlix.
P- 633.
*
The Benedictine D'Achery, in his Monitum on Udalricus's book, says :
'
At enim non eo quo collegit tempore Udalricus illas consuetudines primum
fuisse conditas, sed a multis retro temporibus iam usu receplas legenti palam
net, ut id confirmari opus non sit. Quare eas vetustiores nuncupaie non
duliitavi.' u. s.
5
After referring to the daily recitation of the Quicuiiijite by the monks of
Fleury in the ninth century, Meratus continues Sed ncmim Breviarium :
'
Cluniacense hunc morem non servavit, imino Symbolum hoc pcnitns praeter-
misit.' Merati Observation's ad Cavanti Comi/ientarium, p. 174. So also
Grancolas.
Ff
miseratione divina S. R. E. tituli S. Petri ad vincula Pres-

byter Cardinalis Bullionius, Magnus Franciae Eleemosy-
narius, Electus Abbas, Caput Sacri monasterii ac totius
. . .
Ordinis Cluniacensis, Omnibus et singulis monachis et

monialibus praedicti Ordinis.' dated at Clugni in
It is
November, 1685, and gives a succinct account of the book,

upon what authority it rested, at what time and under
what circumstances it was drawn up, how it was accepted
and issued by the Order, and what was its design and
scope. The Council of Trent decreed that ecclesiastical

books should be corrected. A
beginning was made with
the Roman Breviary, which was revised under Pope
Pius V. Then came the turn of the books of the Regular
'
Orders, and the Breviary of the Italica familia of St. Be-

'
nedict was revised by authority of Paul V. But circum-

stances delayed the revision of the Cluniac Breviary until
during the vacancy of the abbacy in 1676 a solemn assem-

bly of the Order was held, which committed the work to
competent hands. The revisers worked with such success
that in two years their labours were completed, and the
result met with the approval of the assembled Fathers. The
book thus revised was also unanimously accepted in a
general Chapter held after the appointment of a new abbot,
to whom it had been referred the title already mentioned
;
was decided upon with the same unanimity and per- ;
mission was granted to all monasteries and monks of the

Order to use it, all other Breviaries in use at the time
being abrogated. The object was to restore the Cluniac
Breviary to its original condition and to bring it into con-

formity with the Rule of St. Benedict. Hence if any
person should argue that the new Breviary contained some
things at .variance with the usages of other Churches, the
answer was that the Blessed Benedict so willed it. Some
of these discrepancies are specified, one of them being that

the Apostles' Creed was not recited at Prime. Nothing
is said about the omission of the Athanasian Creed. It
may be presumed that this, like the Apostles' Creed, was

omitted because it was not inserted originally by Benedict
in his Rule. This new Cluniac Breviary did not escape
criticismand censure, and at the commencement of the
last century was assailed by Jean Batiste Thiers, who
urged against it a variety of objections. Particularly he

objected to the omission of the Athanasian Creed, alleging
that previously it had been said in the whole Church, in the
Order of St. Benedict, and
congregation of Clugni,
in the
and was still said in many places daily, although it was not
so in the greater number of Churches which were contented
with reciting it on Sunday only 1 . The omission however
continued to be adhered to, and is to this day I presume
adhered to by the Cluniacs, judging from a revised edition

of their Breviary which was issued under authority of
their Abbot and General in 1779. To resume our point
after this brief digression respecting the new Cluniac Bre-
viary, the Athanasian Creed has always been said daily
at Prime by the Carthusians 2 The Cistercians recite it
.
only on Sundays at Prime such at least I gather to be

:
their modern practice from a corrected Breviary of their

Order printed at Paris in 1632 and such appears to have ;
been their practice from the first, for, as before mentioned,

it is alleged against them reproachfully, as though it were
an innovation at the time, in a letter from Abelard to
1
Observations sur le nouvcau Breviaire de Cluni, par Jean Batiste
Thiers, Bruxelles, 1702. In reference to the Athanasian Creed, see torn. ii.
p. 16.
2
Bona, De divina Psaimodia, Parisiis, 1663, p. 452. Also Martene, De
antiquis Ecclesiae ritilnts, lib. iv. cap. viii. ed. 1788, torn. iii.
p. 19. Meratus
and Grancolas affirm the same.
F f 2
St. Bernard J
. As the Mendicant Orders used the secular
2
Breviary ,
it may be inferred that a recitation on Sundays
only was their practice.
In the next place, with regard to the use of the Athana-
sian Creed in the Church, we stated that it was not only
used as a formula of worship, said or sung in the services
of the Church as a Canticle or Psalm, but also as a formula
or instrument of instruction in the Faith.
The earliest evidences of this latter use of it are found
in the its language in sermons on the
employment of
'
Apostles' Creed addressed to catechumens at the Traditio
Symboli,' of which I have produced three instances, the

most conspicuous being supplied by the Treves fragment 3 .
This is an evidence which dates as early as the sixth century.

In these cases the text is necessarily dealt with in a frag-
mentary and incidental manner, and the terminology is not
always adhered to exactly, but sometimes modified or
altered. Much more frequently the document as a whole
or the greater part of it is made the groundwork and
instrument and subject-matter of instruction in the Faith
by means of exposition and comment. In some instances;
as in the Oratorian
Commentary, verse by verse is quoted
with its proper comment subjoined, none being passed
over without some gloss or note. The reason why the
Athanasian Creed was thus made the frequent subject of
exposition is
emphasized by the author of the Commentary
just mentioned, who describes it in his Preface as very
helpful to a knowledge of the Faith when supplemented
by the sayings of doctors and scholars 4 Of the fact we .
1 '
Qui Symbolnm Athanasii diebus tantum dominicis recitare decrevistis.'
Abelardi Epistolae, x.
2
Dictionary of Christian Antiquities, vol. ii. p. 1751.
3 4
Above, Part I. chap. i. sees. 2, 3, 4. Appendix H.
have our hands the most plain and ample evidence in a

in
series ofCommentaries, which were composed during a long

period, beginning probably with the end of the sixth or
commencement of the seventh century and terminating
with the close of the fifteenth, which were moreover not
the product of a single country, but, I may say, of all the
principal countries within the domain of the Western

Church. These Commentaries are sometimes found in
Psalters in the form of a succession of notes written either
in margin by the side of the text which is their
the
subject-matter or between the lines the shorter ones

necessarily in the latter position. In the twelfth and thir-
teenth centuries very commonly they occupy two marginal
columns, one on each side of the text, which is written in

the central column between them. Numerous as are the
Commentaries known to us, I believe it would be a mis-
take to assume that they are all that were ever produced.
Future research will probably bring yet more to light ;
and some we can have little doubt have perished.
The fact that the Athanasian Creed was thus made the
frequent subject of comment by our Christian forefathers
and used by them as a manual of teaching during a period
of considerable duration is an undeniable proof of the
great esteem in which they held it, as an exposition of the

vital doctrines of the Trinity and Incarnation.
Further, from these circumstances of the Creed being

recited in the services of theChurch and also used for the
purpose of instruction two consequences resulted. For, in
the first place, the clergy were of old required to learn it
by heart, that they might be able to use it in both ways, in

celebration of Divine worship and in teaching the people.
That this obligationwas imposed upon presbyters I think
I have shown sufficiently firstly, from its being expressly
;
and repeatedly enjoined by ecclesiastical authority in

Canons and Conciliar or Episcopal Capitularies or enacts
ments or charges * then from the circumstance that their
;
knowledge of it was a subject of inquiry

episcopal at
2
visitations and, thirdly, from its being mentioned with the
;
Apostles' Creed and Lord's Prayer in a list of documents

dating from the ninth century which the clergy were bound
3
to learn .
The second practical consequence of the twofold use

which we have noticed of the Athanasian Creed was its
translation into the vulgar tongue. It has been already
shown 4 that there are versions of it extant at the present

day in Greek, English, German, French, Spanish, Bohe-
mian, Italian, the principal languages of Europe; and in
four of them, viz. Greek, English, German, and French,
there are several different versions. It must be added that
the versions, like the commentaries, are spread over a wide

tract of time, beginning with the ninth century and ending
with the sixteenth. The benefit of the laity was plainly

the object of their composition, that they might be able
to follow the Quictmqtie, if not to join in it, in Church
devoutly and intelligently, to sing with the spirit and to

sing with the understanding also, and at the same time to
derive from it, whether directly or through the expositions
of the clergy, all the instruction it is calculated to impart.
Hincmar's Capitulum directed his presbyters to enuntiate it
in common words, which Waterland understands to mean,
and no doubt rightly, the vulgar tongue.
It is obvious to remark that these versions are a clear
evidence of the widespread use and reception of the Qui-
1
Above, Part I. chap. ii. sees, i, 2, 3, 5, 6,
"j, 8, 10, u, and 12.
2
Part I. chap, ii. sees. 4 and 9.
3
Above, I. ii.
4.
4
Part I. chap. v.
cunque in Europe generally Middle Ages. But they

in the
also prove, as I particularly wish to point out, that its use

was not confined to the clergy, as is sometimes asserted to
have been the case. Had its use been confined to the
clergy, what need could there have been to translate it into
the vernacular at all, the clergy necessarily possessing
a sufficient knowledge of the original? Had it been so,
speaking solely with reference to our own country, to what

purpose were those Saxon glosses and versions, which we
find in Psalters of the tenth, eleventh, and twelfth cen-
turies, written between the lines of the text ;
or the French
versions compiled in our country between the Norman
Conquest and the fourteenth century for the use evidently
of the French-speaking upper classes ;

or the two English
versions, attributed respectively to Schorham and Wyclif,

produced in that century, when
the English language was
growing into wider use and beginning to assert for itself

the supremacy?
In the late Middle Ages we have another evidence of its
popular use in its occasional appearance in books of Hours,
which were books of devotion for the use of the laity more
especially. A remarkable instance of this is found in its
insertion in a Greek version of the Latin Hours, first edited
by Aldus at the end of the fifteenth century *.
Next, we shall proceed to trace the early reception and

use of the Athanasian Creed in the various countries and
Churches of Western Christendom. In approaching this
part of our subject it is necessary to dismiss from the mind
the notion of a prevalent uniformity of ritual in ancient
times, as though ceremonies had been '
in all places one
and utterly like,' whereas 'at all times they have been
2
divers' / Though it may safely be asserted that our docu-
1 2
Part I. chap. v. i. Article xxxiv.
440 Conclusions.
ment has been received and used for more than a thousand
years in the Western Church, we cannot prove to demon-
stration its universal reception even in the West for so
long a period. Necessarily it was received and used in
some countries and local Churches earlier than others,

spreading from one to another by a gradual advance, not
bursting upon all at once with the irresistible force and
instantaneous rapidity of lightning. One more preliminary
remark suggests itself, that to expect full and exact and
explicit information respecting the early history of the
Quicimque would be unreasonable considering our great
ignorance of the remote ages into which it penetrates and
how very few (comparatively speaking) of the documents
which they produced have survived to our times. The
evidence is from the nature of the case limited and incom-
plete, but still of real value, so far as it goes.

The evidence on
the whole appears to point to France
as the country in which the Athanasian Creed was first
received and used. So early as the sixth century it must
have been esteemed there a document of credit and autho-
rity, if we may judge from the adoption of its terminology
in two sermons on the Apostles' Creed preached at the
Symboli/ both belonging to that epoch and

'
Traditio
country
1
. And in the next century we learn from the
Canon of Autun that Burgundy at least the clergy were
in
required to learn by heart under penalty of ecclesiastical

it
censure in the event of disobedience from which it would ;
appear probable that in the same century they recited it
in Divine service. And this indeed is corroborated by the

Preface to the Oratorian Commentary, a work, as we have
seen reason to believe, of the end of the seventh century or
beginning of the eighth, which speaks of its being recited

1
Above, Part I. chap. i. 2, 3.
in Churches here and there l

. As it is uncertain in what
country the so-called Fortunatus and Troyes Commen-

tarieswere composed, they cannot be adduced as witnesses
to the early reception and use of our document in France.
But the Oratorian and the Paris Commentaries, the latter

being a work either of the eighth or seventh century, prove
that in the former century, if not earlier, it must have been
well known in that country and studied and valued as an
authoritative exposition of Christian dogma. And this is
confirmed by the statement found in the Oratorian Preface

that in manuscripts even then old was ascribed by the
it
title to Athanasius. In the Canon of Autun too, dating

a little earlier, it is actually so entitled. No doubt our
Christian forefathers were mistaken in their belief that the
great opponent of Arianism was the author of the Qni-

cunque, but none the less the fact of their so believing is
a proof of the esteem in which they held it. And at the
close of the eighth century we have evidence of its use in
France in two remarkable Psalters, both connected with
Charlemagne, one being dedicated to him by the scribe,
now deposited in the Imperial Library at Vienna, the other
written in triumphal celebration of his victories, now in the
2
Bibliotheque Nationale at Paris It must be added that.
the evidence of these Psalters, though it applies par-
ticularly to France, cannot be limited to that portion of

Charlemagne's dominions, inasmuch as it proves that the
use of the Quicimque had his approval and sanction and ;
his sovereign authority, it must be recollected, was freely

exercised in regard to spiritual matters as well as secular.
In the ninth century the proofs of the use and reception
of our Creed in France are ample and clear. Theodulf,
Bishop of Orleans, exhorts his presbyters to learn it by
2
Appendix H.
1
Part I. iii. 4 and 5.
442 Conclusions. CH.
['
heart, to study so as thoroughly to understand it and to

preach it to the people, i.e. to recite and explain it in the
1
congregation .
Hincmar, Archbishop of Rheims, in his
Capitula enacts that every presbyter should commit it to

memory and understand its meaning and be able to ex-
2
in the vernacular
plain it .
Similarly Riculfus of Soissons
charges each one of his presbyters to learn it, as well as
the Psalms, by heart, and that truthfully and accurately 3 .
And these were not exceptional instances rather what was :
thus enjoined seems to have been generally enjoined from

the time of Charlemagne by bishops in the visitation of their
dioceses, and to have been one of the subjects of official
4
inquiry upon the same occasion Accordingly our docu- .
ment is found in a list of documents which the clergy were

5
required to learn All this would be sufficient illustration
.
of our point. But in addition we find mention of the

Athanasian Creed being sung daily in the important
6
abbey of Fleury on the Loire and we have in our ;
hands tangible proof of its use both in monastic and

secular Churches in two Psalters of this century which con-
tain it, one monastic the Achadeus Psalter in the Parker
7
Library at Cambridge the other secular the costly
,
Psalter of the Emperor Charles the Bald now at Paris 8 .
And the letter of Florus the Deacon of Lyons, which treats

of its admission to Psalters as a customary and long-
established practice at the time, is a comment upon its
appearance in these
Psalters, teaching us to see in this
nothing peculiar, nothing abnormal, and showing that they

are not to be regarded as the only Psalters of their age
and country which contained it, but rather as samples of
1 2 3
See above, I. ii. 3. Above, I. ii.
7. Above, I. ii. 8.
1 5 c 7
I. ii. 4, 9 and 10. I. ii.
4. I. i. 10. I. iii. 15.
8
I. iii. 14.
a vast multitude of others which did so, all of which are

now lost to us through the waste and destruction of docu-
ments which have been continually going on. I have
omitted any mention here of the Utrecht Psalter, although
most probably it may be assigned to the early part of this
century, as nothing seems to be known for certain respect-
ing the locality which produced it.
It might possibly be argued from the fact of the Atha-
nasian Creed not being mentioned in Amalarius's account

of the Office of Prime contained in his work De Eccle-
siasticis Ojficiis, that it could not have been recited in
Divine service in France during the reign of the Emperor
Louis the Meek, to whom that work was dedicated, and
still during the reign of his father. But this negative
less
argument cannot overthrow the positive evidences of its

both reigns furnished by the two Psalters above
recital in
mentioned as connected with Charlemagne, by the letter

1
of Florus the Deacon and by the Capitulare and Capi-
,
2
tula of Theodulf .
Moreover, from the writings of two
contemporary divines, both men of reputation for learning
in their age and of eminence and weight in the Church of
Lyons in which Amalarius held the office of Chorepi-
scopus, we are able to gather in what estimation he was

held, and whether the ritual described in his work was
strictly in that Church, where if anywhere we
observed
might expect would have been observed. The first of
it
these is Agobard, who was Bishop of Lyons it may be

said during the whole of Louis' reign. He not only com-
posed a book criticizing and censuring the work of Ama-
larjus, but also describes him as a foolish and unprin- '
cipled person,' who 'was constantly harassing our holy

Church, the Church of Lyons, not only by words, but also
1 2
Li. 12. I. i. 8.
444 Conclusions, [CH.
by his writings, as though it did not celebrate rightly nor

after the manner and use of our fathers the solemn offices
of Divine worship V The second Florus the Deacon of

Lyons, whose letter to Hyldrad has been previously
noticed possible even more severe in his strictures.
is if
In a letter addressed to several bishops he speaks of the

work of Amalarius as
'
being full of absurdities and errors,

so much so as to make him the object of ridicule and con-
tempt,' and concludes by stating that he had endeavoured

'
to introduce scandalous errors and superstitions contrary

to the truth of the Scriptures, the authority of the Fathers,
and the reasonable order of the Church V He also says
that the case of Amalarius was submitted to a Council of
bishops specially assembled by command of Louis the
Meek, and his teaching was condemned as at variance with

the true faith and unknown to
any of the orthodox
3
Fathers Such being the sentiments of bishops and
.
clergy, who were contemporaries and fellow-countrymen

of AmalariuSj respecting him and his work on the Offices
of the Church, is it possible to suppose that it was
accepted by them as the code of ritual for their Church
and ministry?
After France it would appear that the Athanasian Creed
was received and used in North Italy earlier than in any
country ;
and this we should expect to find if, as I believe
to be probable, it emanated from Lerins. It must have
been received and used in some diocese of that country as
early as the sixth century if the Ballerini are right respecting

' '
the date of the Epistola Canonica and the reference of

1
See Migne, Patrol. Lai. torn. civ. p. 339 also ibid. p. 325. ;
2
Migne, Patrol. Lat. torn. cxix. pp. 77-79, Epistola Flori adversus ad-
inveutiones Amalarii.
3
Flori opiisculum de causa, fidci apud Carisiacense episcoporum concilium
nuper habita; u. s.
*
its first Capitulum ; and the opinion of those learned
canonists is entitled to some deference. In the tenth cen-
tury Atto, Bishop of Vercellae, drew up for the use of his
own diocese a new Capitulare or series of injunctions) and
adopted as one of them Capitulum of the Epistola
this first
Canonica, clearly understanding and intending others to it
understand it as referring to the Quicunqtte 2 Here then .
is a testimony to the sense in which that Capitulum was

received by a learned man of the tenth century, a bishop
of the same country, possibly of the same province, it may
be of the same diocese, in which it was originally issued, as
well as to the use of the Creed under authority at that epoch.
In the same century also we are informed that in another
diocese in North Italy, situated at some distance from Ver-
cellae and in a different province, viz. Verona, the clergy
were required by their bishop to learn it by heart together

with the two other Creeds, as well as to recite it 3 In .
connexion with these authoritative injunctions it should be

considered that our document is found in an extant con-
temporaneous Psalter, which from internal evidence appears

to have been compiled either in the diocese of Milan or
some other diocese of the province to which it belonged
4
Liguria . But the most important evidence of the early
reception and use of the Quicunque in North Italy is
furnished being said as we have every

by the fact of its
reason to believe from a remote antiquity in the Milanese

or Ambrosian rite or office of Divine worship, being sung
daily at Prime, as already mentioned. The Ambrosian rite
or book of Offices, it must be remembered, is distinct in

origin and type from other rites of the Western Church,
whether secular or monastic, from the former as repre-
2 3
1
Above, I. ii. i. Above, I. ii. n. I. ii. 12.
4
I. iii. 21.
sented principally by the Gregorian or Roman Breviary,

from the latter as represented principally by the Benedictine
Two of its peculiarities may be worth mentioning, as they
are both indications of antiquity its retention of the
Roman Psalter, and the fact of its showing Greek in-

fluences, particularly in regard to the Canticles, which are
from those usually found in Latin Psalters 1
different .
Hence the appearance of the Athanasian Creed in the

Ambrosian Offices possesses a peculiar significance as an
independent testimony to its early origin and use. Dr.

Ceriani, the learned custodian of the Ambrosian Library
and Canon of Milan Cathedral, with his usual readiness to
communicate information, has written in answer to my in-
quiries that
'
he is not aware of any manuscript evidence of
the use of the Athanasian Symbol in the Ambrosian Office
earlierthan the MS. dating about the eleventh century of
the Ambrosian Breviary, which is preserved in the Library
of the Chapter of Milan Cathedral. Just towards the end
there occurs the Ordinary of the First, Third, Sixth, and
Ninth Hours and Compline ;
and in the Hour of Prime is
indicated the recital of the Athanasian Symbol at the

same place, where it is recited even now, immediately after
the Epistolella. Other manuscript Breviaries of the tenth
and eleventh centuries are mutilated and do not include
the Order of the small Hours of the Office. But the Bre-
viary of the Metropolitan Chapter agrees with them in the
most ancient parts, and its testimony proves the use of its
time ; nothing to indicate that that use com^
but there is
menced then only.' Dr. Ceriani went on to express his

regret at not being able to supply more ample information,
1
See Dictionary of Christian Antiquities, article on Psalmody, vol. ii.
p. 1752. The Abbe Duchesne traces Greek influence in the Ambrosian
Liturgy also j Origines du Ciilte Chretien, chap. iii. 2.
VI
.] Reception and Use. 447
adding :
'
Whilst we have MSS. of the Ambrosian Mass
of the commencement of the ninth century, complete or
nearly so, in regard to the Breviary we are less fortunate.'

I must avouch that the regret expressed by the learned
Librarian appears to me to be groundless. Neither the
Roman nor the Benedictine Breviaries, there seems every
reason to believe, were compiled before the time of
Gregory VII, i. e. than the latter part of the
earlier
eleventh century, and the earliest MS. known of either is

dated A.D. 1099 1
. How then could we expect to find
a MS.
of the Ambrosian Breviary, which compared with
either of those rites was used within a very small area,
of earlier date than the eleventh century ? In all proba-
bility the MSS. of the Ambrosian Breviary, from which
the Offices for the small Hours, including of course the
Athanasian Creed, are absent in consequence of their
mutilation, in their original complete condition contained
the Creed. However this be, whenever it was inserted in
the Ambrosian Breviary and, as we see, that could not
have taken place later than the eleventh century, and most
probably took place earlier we may be sure that it must
have been previously used for some considerable time in
the services of the Milanese Church.
Next, we pass to Germany. And here the Treves frag-

ment meets us on the threshold but, notwithstanding the ;
importance of that document as a proof of the antiquity of

the Athanasian Creed, clearly it would be irrelevant to
adduce it in testimony to its early use and reception in
Germany, or indeed any other particular country, for this
very obvious reason, that we are in perfect ignorance as

to the locality in which the sermon, of which the said
1
See Dictionary of Christian Antiquities, article Breviary ;
also above,
I. iii. 27.
fragment formed a portion originally, was preached, no less
than as to the person who preached or composed it. We

do not know what country that sermon was composed,
in
whether Germany or France or Italy or any other country.

We do not even know that the MS. at Treves, in which
the writer of the Paris MS. containing this fragment found
it and from which he copied it, was written at that place.
It may have been written there, but there is no proof that
it was it may have been

;
brought there from some other
place. Apart from this, however, there is abundant evi-
dence of the reception and use of the Athanasian Creed in
Germany from the close of the eighth century downwards.
This is found first of all in the two remarkable Psalters
of that epoch connected with Charlemagne, which have
been already mentioned in this section, one deposited at
Vienna, the other at Paris, and which, as bearing so to
speak his image and superscription, obviously point to
the conclusion that under his sovereign approval and in his
time the Creed was used in Divine service in Germany as
well as France. The Vienna Psalter too is specially asso-
ciated with the former country by the recorded tradition
that it was for some time one of the treasures of the
Church of Bremen, having been presented to it originally
by Charlemagne himself
1
. And the testimony of these
Psalters is corroborated by other evidence, which shows
that from the time of Charlemagne the Quicunqite was
required within his dominions, and therefore in Germany,
to be learntand expounded by the clergy, and was made
a subject of direction and admonition by bishops in the
2
visitation of their dioceses, and also of inquiry Thus early .
in the ninth century Hatto or Hetto or Ahyto of Basle

in his Capitula ordered his clergy to learn our document
1 a
Above, I. iii. 4. Above, I. ii.
4.
by heart and recite on Sundays 1

it And in a more .
important series of Capitula and of wider application

which has hitherto escaped notice drawn up in the reign
of the Emperor Lothair and within his dominions, its use
and observance are enjoined upon clergy, and that as
matters of canonical obligation concerning which they
must render account to the bishop in synod 2 As illus- .
trating this canonical use of it in the time of Lothair and

with his sanction, we can point to a sumptuous Psalter
also lately come to light written in honour of that Em-
3
peror and containing his portrait Side by side with this .
may fitly be considered another Psalter of the same epoch

that commonly called Athelstan's Psalter in the Cotton
Collection which Sir Edward Thompson has shown as
far as regards its substance, i. e. the Psalms and Canticles,
including of course the Athanasian Creed, to have been

4
written in Germany So early as the middle of this cen-
.
tury it was used in that country for purposes of devotion

and instruction by the laity as well as the clergy, as we
learn from the fact of its being inserted, together with
the Lord's Prayer, a list of Peccata criminalia, the Apo-

stles' Creed, and the Gloria in excelsis, in the Catechesis
Theotisca, each document being accompanied by a German
5
translation . Other evidences of the early use and recep-
tion of the Athanasian Creed in Germany occur in the
request made for its recital at his death-bed by Anscharius,
Archbishop of Hamburg and Bremen
6
,
and in the work
upon Ecclesiastical Discipline, compiled by Regino Abbot
of Prum at the beginning of the tenth century, wherein
one of the inquiries to be made of presbyters by the bishop
or his representatives has respect to their knowledge of
2 3 4 5
1
I. ii.
5. I. ii. 6. I. Hi. 9. I. iii. u. I. v. 3.
6
I. i. 14.
'
the discourse of Bishop Athanasius concerning the Faith
of the Holy Trinity V
It must be remembered that Re-
gino's book is avowedly drawn from earlier documents, and

may therefore be considered a record of long-established
usage.
Of the use and reception of the Athanasian Creed by our
Saxon forefathers in our own Church and country ample
proof has been alleged. At the end of the eighth century
Denebert in his profession of faith at his consecration to the
bishopric of the Wiccii or Worcester quotes several verses

of it as the expression of his belief in the doctrine of the
Holy Trinity : and he_ introduces his quotation by a term

which would be most unfitting unless it were used in
and authoritative document 2
reference to a well-known .
Of use in the Offices of the English Church prior to the

its
Norman Conquest visible memorials exist in three Psalters

of the tenth century, one deposited in the British Museum,
another in the Lambeth Library, the third in the Cathedral
Library at Salisbury And their witness is continued
3
.
down to the Norman Conquest and later by other Psalters,

three of which only I have deemed it sufficient to mention 4 .
This testimony is confirmed and illustrated by Abbo of

Fleury, a competent witness in the matter, inasmuch as he
had spent some time in England, who, writing at the close
of the tenth century, states from his own knowledge that in
the Church of England as well as in France the Quicunque
was then sung antiphonally 5 Contemporaneous with this .
evidence of devotional use in our country we have an

its
indication of its being used also for the purposes of popular

instruction in the fact that language and phrases obviously
borrowed from it are incorporated into Êlfric's Homily
1 2 3
I. ii. 9. .
Above, I. i.
5. I. iii. 17, 18, and 19.
4 5
I. iii. 23', 24, 25. I. i. 21.
VI
.] Reception and Use. 451
on the Catholic Faith 1

. And we can point to a still more
conspicuous proof of its use not being confined to the
clergy in another fact, viz. that in Psalters dating from the

tenth century to the twelfth it is accompanied by an inter-
2
linear Saxon gloss or version . What was the object of
this vernacular gloss or version but to enable the people
or laity better to understand the meaning of the original
document, to sing with the understanding as well as the
heart ?
The fact of the earliest known MS. of the Athanasian

Creed being written in an Irish hand of the eighth century
obviously points to the inference that our document must
have been known and esteemed in the Irish Church at
that period 3
. And this is a point of real interest consider-
ing the independent position of that Church in the early

Middle Ages, the peculiarities of its organization and ritual,
and its great missionary activity. Another evidence of the
connexion of the Quicung2ie with the ancient Irish Church
has been adduced in a manuscript written not later than
A.D.noo, which the late Bishop Reeves was the first to
draw attention to 4 .
Of the
early use and reception of the Athanasian Creed
in Central Italy and Rome we possess comparatively but
little information. Grancolas asserts it to be impossible to
say at what time it was inserted in the Roman Office
5
,
Meratus makes the same assertion . No doubt they are
1
I. i. 22.
The Eadwin
'
J
Psalter of the time of Stephen, belonging to Trinity College,
Cambridge, contains a Saxon as well as a French version, as previously men-

tioned. Saxon glosses appear also in all but one of the six Psalters just
referred to, besides others.
3 4
I. iii. i. I. i. 23.
5
'On ne petit dire a quel temps on a insere Quictmqtie dans 1'Office
Romain.' La Liturgie, Paris, 1752, p. 333.
Quo tempore hoc Symbolum Romano
6 '
Officio insertum fuerit, exploratum
G g 2
right be worth while to inquire how far back

;
but it may
the evidence we can produce enables us to trace its con-
nexion with the Roman Office. Its appearance in Roman
Breviaries, both printed and manuscript, necessarily points
to the inference that it had a place in the Roman Breviary
from the time when that book was originally compiled and
adopted into use. And this Inference is confirmed by the
statement of Guyetus, above mentioned, that it is found in
all ancient Breviaries, and by the fact that Honorius of
Autun describes it at the commencement of the twelfth
century as one of the four Creeds which 'the Catholic

Church preserves in their integrity in the four regions of
the world
'
if so, in Italy and Rome and
;
he adds that
it was recited at Prime daily 1
. It must be particularly
considered that appears in the earliest manuscript Bre-
it
viary extant, a book written in the Benedictine monastery

at Monte Casino at the end of the eleventh century, and
probably used there

2
And this is a consideration of some
.
moment, as the compilation of the Breviary is commonly

attributed to
Gregory VII, meaning I presume that it
was executed under his authority and direction, at any
rate during his pontificate, which was but a little ante-
cedent in date 1073 to 1085. There is thus good reason
for believing that our document had a place in the Roman
Breviary as originally constructed. And this being the

case, it must have been previously used, probably for some
considerable time, in the Roman Office. This we might
non habemus.' Gavanti Thesaiirus cum Observationibus Merati, Paris, 1763,

torn. ii.
p. 173.
1 '
Fidem Catholicam quatuor temporibus editam, imo roboratam, Ecclesia
'
Catholica recipit et in quatuor mundi climatibus custodit ; and afterwards,
Quarto, fidem Quicunque milt quotidie ad Primam iterat.' See above, I. i. 24
'
note, where the passage is quoted in exienso.

8
Above, I. iii. 27.
conclude a priori. But we are not without evidence in sup-

port of such conclusion. Of the monastic use of \h&Quicunque
in Central Italy, and probably in Rome or its neighbour-
hood, in the eleventh and tenth centuries, we have seen
proof in two manuscript Psalters above noticed Canonici
1
Patr. Lat. 88 and Vat. 84 . But these, being Benedictine
books, can prove nothing as to its contemporaneous use
in secular Churches in Central Italy or Rome. For evi-
dence on this point we may turn to the very remarkable
letter addressed by Abelard to St. Bernard, probably about
2
1130 A.D. Abelard had been accused by St. Bernard of
allowing an innovation in the daily Hour services. He
replies by retorting sharply the charge of innovation upon
the Order, viz. the Cistercians, to which his accuser be-
You, who are but

'
longed, and that in several particulars :
newly sprung into being and who delight exceedingly in

novelty, by certain novel decrees have appointed the Divine
Office to be celebrated among yourselves in a manner
different from the custom of all, clerks as well as monks,
which had been long before in use and continues to be so
at the present day V One of the innovations with which
he charges the Cistercians was that they had 'decreed that
the Symbol of Athanasius should be recited on Sundays
4
only .' This was clearly an innovation at the time when
the Cistercian Order was founded the close of the eleventh
century the daily recital of the Creed being then the
general, if not the universal practice, as we have before

noticed in accordance with the testimony of Honorius of
1 2
I. iii. 22, 26. Migne, Patrol. Lat. torn, clxxviii. pp. 335-339.
3
Vos quippe, quasi noviter exorti ac de novitate plurimum gaudentes,
'
praeter consuetudinem omnium, tarn clericorum quam monachorum, longe ante

habitam et nunc quoque permanentem, novis quibusdam decretis aliter apud
yos divinum officium instituistis agi.'
* '
Symbolum Athanasii diebus tantum dominicis recitare decrevistis.'
Autun and Udalricus. And it is inconceivable that the

Roman Church could have been an exception to the
general practice. Abelard in making this charge of inno-
vation must have been well aware of the custom of clerks
'
'
as well as monks in that great centre, long before in use
and stillcontinuing, and indeed must have had it before
his mind, for in this very letter he makes a distinct and
express allusion to a remarkable diversity of use connected
with the Divine Office between the Lateran, its mother
Church, and other Churches, including the Basilica of
its
St. Peter's, thus showing that he possessed an accurate
knowledge of the religions observances prevalent there in

his own day and for some time previous. It seems then
certain that the Athanasian Creed was recited in the
Roman Office in the eleventh century before its revision
by Gregory VII, and probably it was so yet earlier in the
tenth. In the ninth century probably about 830 Ama-

Jarius in his account of Prime, which is full and particular,
makes no mention of it, as we have before stated, speaking

1
only of the Apostles' Creed as being recited Hence it .
is obvious that at that time it could not have been inserted
in the Roman Office, if the work of Amalarius is descrip-

tive of that, as Monsieur BatifTol considers 2 . But this
does not appear to be the case if we may judge from the
author's own words. In his prologue to another work,
De Ordine Antiphonarii, he, i.e. Amalarius, dwells upon
the manifold discrepancy between the Roman Antiphonary
and that in use in his own Church and country in nostra
'
provincia,' the
province of Lugdunensis Prima, of which
Lyons was the metropolis. He had compared the two,
1
Amalarius, de Officiis Ecclesiastids, iv. 2. See Migne, Patrol. Lai. torn. cv.
pp. 1165-1169.
2
Histoire du Br&oiaire Remain, p. 282.
and his plan in arranging his own book was to follow

neither exclusively, but in some places one and in some
the other, as the one or the other appeared to him pre-
ferable, and in passages, where neither approved itself to
his judgement, he inserted something more in accordance
with reason 1 This would lead us to expect that if the
.
Roman Office had been before him when he composed his

work on the Offices of the Church, or if he had followed it
in whole or in part, he would have said so. But neither

in his dedicatory preface addressed to Louis the Meek nor
his other preface does he mention the Roman Office at all ;
' ' '

he speaks only of our Offices and our Office,' the Offices
clearly of his own Church of Lyons. My ardent desire,' '
he says, was to know what the early authors and framers

'
of our Offices had in their minds'; but adds: 'I could

scarcely affirm that I had put into writing precisely what
they thought out': hence he apprehended the censure of
his critics forhaving written a dangerous book, not giving
a true representation of the minds of the authors of our
'
Offices 2 .' Thus it appears that in the composition of his

work on Church Offices he made no use of the Roman
Office, that he had the Offices of his own Church alone
before him, but these he did not follow closely nor literally
nor fully a circumstance which goes far to account for
the hostility manifested against him and his book by the
Metropolitan and other Bishops and authorities of the
Church of Lyons. It may be added that it was not till
Amalarius, de Online Antiphonarii, Prologus; Migne, Patrol.
1
Lett. torn,
cv. pp. 1243, 1244.

2 '
Ardor mihi inerat ut scirem quid priores auctores haberent in corde, qui
nostra officia statuerunt. Sed quia difiicillimum mihi est affirmare ut identidem
scripsissem quod illi meditabantur,' &c. Defendar ab illis qui me voluerint
'
carpere, quasi periculose scripsissem,

eo quod mentes auctorum officii nostri
non praesentes haberem.' Amalarii de Ecclesiasticis OJficiis libri, Praefatio ;
Migne, u. s.
p. 987.
after he wrote his work on the Offices that he visited

Rome, when he was sent by Emperor and applied
there the
on his behalf to the Pope then Gregory IV for a copy
of the Roman Antiphonary. And if his book was not
based upon the Roman Office, clearly the absence of any
mention of the Athanasian Creed is no proof that it was
not at the time recited in the basilicas and secular churches
at Rome. But, on the other hand, there seems no evi-
dence that it was. When it was inserted in the Roman
Office is a matter of uncertainty, as the Liturgists assert.
And this want of evidence of its use at Rome, at least as
regards the secular churches, in the ninth century is a
striking fact, considering the abundant evidence which we

have of its use at the same epoch to the north of the Alps
in France and Germany. It did not come to us from
Rome, we have reason to believe, but from France.

We
cannot be surprised at the absence of any early
evidence of the use and reception of the Athanasian
Creed in South Italy and Sicily, as it appears that the
Greek rite was prevalent in the former country as late as
the twelfth century, and in the latter later still in the
1
thirteenth .
Our document, having no place in the Mozarabic rite,
could not have been used in Spain and Portugal until the
year 1091, when that rite was finally abolished and the
Gallican Office and Psalter substituted for the change it ;
being carried through, to the great sorrow of the people,
'
1 '
The
natives of Calabria were still A. D. 1155 '
attached to the Greek
language and worship, which had been inexorably proscribed by the Latin
clergy.' Gibbon's History, Milman's edition, 1839, vol. x. p. 304. See also
pp. 239, 240. Milman says that in the thirteenth century 'the Greek Christians
were still in considerable numbers in the kingdom of Sicily, had their own
priests, and celebrated undisturbed their own rites.' Latin Christianity,
vol. iv. p. 262. ,
by Alphonso VI, king of Castile and Leon, actuated by

two very potent influences, that of the Pope and that of
his wife, Constance daughter of Robert, duke of Burgundy,
who was fondly attached to the religious usages of her

native country 1
The Gallican Office being thus intro-
.
duced into Spain, the Quicunque necessarily came into use

with it.
Thus far I have referred to the use and reception of the

Athanasian Creed in the Western Church only. In the
Eastern Orthodox Church it has never been received as
a Creed, nor in any of its branches, including of course its
most important and vigorous branch, the Russian Church.

Nor has it ever been recited in the Offices of the Eastern
Church, nor those of any of her branches. The same may
be said of the Apostles' Creed. Both these Creeds are
Western documents. The Constantinopolitan Creed of
course without the Filioque clause the Nicene so-called
isthe Creed said in the Eastern Offices, as in the Eastern
2
Liturgy, viz. at Compline and the Midnight Office .
An undue significance has been attached, it must be

admitted, sometimes of late to the insertion of our docu-
ment in the only form in which the Greeks acknowledge
it without the KOI TOV vlov in ver. 23 in the Appendix

of the modern Greek Horologium, as though proving its
reception by the Greek Church, whereas that very position
shows that it has no place in the Offices of the Horologium.
At the same time, the fact of its being admitted to this
position under the express and repeated sanction of the
ecclesiastical authorities at Constantinople may be under-
stood apparently to indicate the acceptance and approval
1
Appendix D.
2
See Neale, Eastern Church, pp. 910 and 912. Also '&po\6yiov TO
Venice, 1868, pp. 15 and 157.
of our Creed on the part of the Eastern Church as a

doctrinal formula, barring the doctrine of the double
Procession of the Holy Ghost. On this point, the marked
exclusion of the words f
and of the Son/ especially when
considered in connexion with the evident allusion to it in
the subjoined note, can only be regarded, I fear, as

accentuating the difference between the Eastern and
Western Churches 1
. With a similar reservation it is
necessary to understand the guarded language of Plato,

Archbishop of Moscow, in regard to its use and acceptance
by the Russian Church Our Church acknowledges the :
'
Symbol of St. Athanasius and it has a place among

ecclesiastical books, we are also enjoined to follow the
faith which it teaches, but it is never recited. It is
sufficient for us that it contains nothing which is not

2
agreeable with sound and orthodox doctrine .' This
must have reference to the Creed only in the text
regarded authentic by Eastern theologians.

as It is
necessary to add that the insertion of it in the Horologium,

3
dating as has been shown above from so recent a period
as the latter part of the eighteenth century, can have no
significance except as regards the modern Eastern Church.

The Armenian Church, my knowledge, to the best of
is only Eastern community which receives the
the
Athanasian Creed. According to Neale, it 'possesses
nine principal confessions of Faith. Three of these are
the Apostles', the Nicene, and the Athanasian Creeds ;
1
See above, I. v. i, g. pp. 300-304.
a
'Symbolum Sancti Athanasii
nostra agnoscit, et inter libros
Ecclesia
ecclesiasticos reperitur, et ut eius (idem sequamur inculcalur, tamen nunquam
recitatur. Satis pro nobis est, quod nihil quidquam in se contineat, quod sanae
atque orthodoxae doctrinae non sit consentaneum.' Quoted by Naves, Dis-

rcurses on the Three Creeds, p. 82.
"
See I. v. i, g. pp. 300-304.
Reception and Use. 459
the first and last of which

probably received through
it
Rome 1
I should apprehend that it does not receive it
.'
5
with the words 'and the Son in reference to the Pro-
cession, but on this point I am
unable to state anything
for certain. The same author adds that he believes that '
the Armenians, however much unhappily

separated from
the Eastern Church, are not really heretical V They are
separated from the Eastern Church, it must be remembered,

in consequence of their lying under the imputation of
Monophysitism and rejecting the Council of Chalcedon.
1
Holy Eastern Church, Part I, p. 1083.
a
See u. s., Dissertation If.
OPUS FINITUM EST. DEO GKATIAS.

APPENDIX.
A.
Copy of the fragment of a discourse in the Paris Bibliotheque

Nationals MS. Latin, 3836 (Colbert, 784), closely related
to the Athanasian Creed. This fragment has been fre-
qttently, biit inaccttrately, described as the Colbertine MS.
of the Creed.
INVINI TREVERIS IN UNO LIBRO SCRIPTUM . SIC INCIPI-

ENTE DOMINI NOSTRI IHESU CHRISTI . ET RELIQUA DOMINI
NOSTRI . IHESU CHRISTI FIDELITER CREDAT.Est CrgO fides TCCta
ut credamus confitemur quia dominus ihesus christus dei filius.
et
Deus pariter et homo est. Deus est de substancia patris. Ante
saecula genitus. Et homo de substancia matris in saeculo natus.
perfectus deus. perfectus homo ex anima rationabili. et humana
carne subsistens aequalis patri saecundum divinitatem
minor
patri. secundum humanitatem qui licet deus. sit homo non
duo tamen sed unus est christus. unus autem non ex eo quod
sit in carne. Conversa divinitas. sed quia est in deo adsumpta
dignanter humanitas. unus christus est non confusione sub-
stanciae sed unitatem personae qui secundum fidem nostram
passus et mortuos ad inferna discendens.

Et die tertia resurrexit
adque ad celos ascendit. Ad dexteram dei patris sedet sicut
vobis in simbulo tradutum est Inde ad iudicandos vivos et
mortuos. credimus et speramus eum esse venturum. Ad cuius
adventum erunt omnes homines, sine dubio in suis corporibus
propriis rationem ut qui bona

resurrecturi et reddituri de factis
egerunt eant in vitam aeternam qui mala in ignem aeternum.

Haec est fides, sancta et catholica. quam omnes homo qui
ad vitam aeternam pervenire desiderat scire integrae debet. et
fideliter custodire.
462 Appendix.
In the above transcript I have endeavoured to reproduce
accurately the spelling and punctuation of the MS. as represented
in the facsimile of the Palaeographical Society. The capitals also
have been copied. The contractions I have omitted besides :
those of the sacred name, there are but three. The line in the
MS. commencing de sulstanria patris and ending natus. per
appears to have been rewritten, but by the original writer, as it is
in smaller and more compressed characters than the rest, though
evidently by the same hand : it shows marks also of erasure

throughout, which are perceptible in the MS. though they cannot
be detected in the facsimile. Probably, after the scribe had copied
the fragment, he found that some words had been omitted from
and he rewrote it on purpose to bring them in. What
this line,
confirms this conjecture is, that the words ds est seem to have
been added on at the end of the preceding line. Dr. Swainson
asserted that the words thus omitted in the first instance were
ante saecula genitus 1 but there could be no ground for the
:
assertion, as it must be quite impossible to determine what the

words were.
B.
' '
Copy of the latter part of the Admonitio synodalis antiqua

relating to ritual.
De ministerio etiam vobis commisso vos admonere curamus, ut
unusquisque vestrum, si fieri potest, expositionem Symboli et

Orationem Dominicam iuxta traditionem orthodoxorum Patrum
penes se habeat scriptam et earn pleniter intelligat et inde
praedicando populum sibi commissum sedulo instruat: si non,
saltern teneat vel credat. Orationes quoque Missarum et prae-
fationes et Canonem bene intelligat. Et si non, saltern distincte
ac memoriter proferre valeat. Epistolam et Evangelium bene
legere possit : et utinam saltern ad literam eius sensum posset
manifestare. Psalmorum verba et distinctiones regulariter ex
corde cum canticis consuetudinariis pronuntiare sciat. Sermonem

Athanasii de fide sanctae Trinitatis, cuius initium est Quicunque
vult, memoriter teneat et omni die cantet. Exorcismos et
1
The Nicene and Apostles Creeds, p. 3 1 9 note.
Appendix. 463
orationes ad Catechumenum
faciendum, ad fontem quoque
consecrandum, aut reliquas preces super masculum et feminam
pluraliter et singulariter valeat et sciat distincte proferre. Similiter
ordinem baptizandi ad succurrendum infirmis. Ordinem quoque
reconciliandi iuxta modum sibi canonice reservatum atque
ungendi
infirmos, orationes quoque eidem necessitati competentes, bene
saltern sciat legere. Similiter ordinem et preces in exsequiis
atque agendis defunctorum. Similiter exorcismos et benedic-

tiones salis et aquae memoriter teneat. Canticum nocturnum
atque diurnum noverit. Computum, si non maiorem, saltern
minorem, id est, epactas, concurrentes, regulares, terminos
paschales, et reliquos, si est possibile, sapiat. Martyrologium
et Paenitentiale habeat, ut secundum quod ibi scriptum est
interroget confitentem.
See Regino de Ecclesiasticis Disciplinis, edidit Baluzius, 1671,
Paris, p. 604; Appendix actorum veterum, No. 2. Also Migne,
Patrol. Lat. torn, cxxxi. pp. 455-8.
C.
Confession of Faith in the Sanim '

Ordo ad visitandum
infirmum'
Rubric : Deinde priusquam ungatur infinmts aut communicetur,
exhortetur eum sacerdos hoc modo.
Frater carissime, quia viam universae carnis ingressurus es, esto
firmus in fide. Qui enim non est firmus in fide, infidelis est et :
sine fide impossibile est placere Deo. Et ideo, si salvus esse

volueris, ante omnia opus est, ut teneas Catholicam Fidem :
quam nisi integram inviolatamque servaveris, absque dubio in

aeternum peribis.
Rubric : Deinde bonum et valde expediens est ut sacerdos
cxprimat infirmo XIIII articulos fidei, quorum VII primi ad

mysterium Trinitatis et VII alii ad Christi humanitatem pertinent :
ut si forte prius in aliquo ipsorum erraverit, titubaverit, vel dubius
fuerit, ante mortem, ditm adhuc spiritus unitus est carni, ad fidem
solidam reducatur: et potest sacerdos diccre sic.
Fides autem Catholica haec est, frater. Credere in unum

464 Appendix.
Deum : hoc est, in unitate divinae essentiae in trium personarum

:
indivisibili Trinitate. II. Patrem ingenitum esse Deum. III.

Unigenitum Dei Filium : esse Deum per omnia coaequalem Patri.
IIII. Spiritum Sanctum, non genitum, non factum, non creatum :
sed a Patre et Filio pariter procedentem esse Deum Patri :
Filioque consubstantialem etiam et aequalem. V. Creationem

caeli et terrae, id est, omnis visibilis et invisibilis creaturae a tota
indivisibili Trinitate. VI. Sanctificationem Ecclesiae per Spiritum
Sanctum et gratiae sacramenta ac caetera omnia, in quibus
communicat Ecclesia Christiana : in quo intelligitur, quod
Ecclesia Catholica cum suis sacramentis et legibus per Spiritum
Sanctum regulata, omni
quantumcunque facinoroso
homini,
peccatori, sufficit quod extra Ecclesiam Catho-
ad salutem : et
licam non est salus. VII. Consummationem Ecclesiae per

gloriam sempiternam, in anima et carne veraciter suscitanda :
et per cuius oppositum intelligitur aeterna damnatio reproborum.

Si vis ergo salvus esse, frater, ita de mysterio Trinitatis sentias.
RubricDeinde exprimat ei sacerdos alias septem

: articulos ad
Christi humanitatem pertinentes hoc modo.
Similiter, frater carissime, necessarium est ad aeternam salutem,

ut credas et confitearis Domini nostri lesu Christi incarnationem
per Spiritum Sanctum ex sola Virgine gloriosa. II. Veram

incarnati Dei nativitatem ex Virgine incorrupta. III. Veram
Christi passionem et mortem sub tyrannide Pilati. IIII. Veram
Christi descensionem ad inferos in anima ad spoliationem Tartar!,
quiescente corpora eius in sepulchro. V. Veram Christi Dei

tertia die a morte resurrectionem. VI. Veram ipsius ad caelos
ascensionem. VII. Ipsius venturi ad iudicium certissimam
expectationem. Haec
Fides Catholica, frater, quam nisi
est
fideliter firmiterque credideris, sicut Mater Ecclesia credit, salvus
esse non poteris.

'
If the sick person is laicus vel simpliciter literatus,' the priest
may require his assent to a more brief Confession of Faith, which

is not, may be observed, the Apostles' Creed.
it
The above is copied from MaskelPs Monumenta Ritualia, 2nd

edition, 1882, vol. i.
p. 89.
Appendix. 465
D.
Latin Psalters.
The various versions of the Psalter in Latin are called
respectively Italic, Roman, Gallican, and Hebraic.

(a) St. Augustine speaks of the great number of Latin versions
of the Holy Scriptures current in his time, but singles out one
from the whole number distinguished by the name of Itala as
preferable on account of its accuracy and perspicuity *. By the
Italic Psalter is denoted the Psalter of this old Latin version of
the Old Testament, which was originally translated from the LXX,
in all probability in Africa called Itala because accepted and
used in Italy, called also Vetus by St. Gregory the Great, and
Vulgata by St. Jerome. It was the Psalter, we may say, of the
Latin Church before the time of St. Jerome possessing the
highest authorityand most generally used it is the Psalter used :
by St. Augustine in quotations and in his Commentaries on the

Psalms ; and therefore presumably used in the African Church in
his time.
(b) About A.D. 383 St. Jerome with the view of removing
obscurities, which offended the fastidious taste of the Romans,

corrected the Psalter by the text of the LXX at the request of
Pope Damasus : but his recension, as we learn from his epistle to

Paula and Eustochium, was for the most part of a cursoiy nature 2 .
This first revision by Jerome is the Roman Psalter called so

because it was adopted and used by the Roman Church, sup-
planting the old version. It was also accepted and used by the
ancient Spanish Church, as appears from the fact that the version
of the Mozarabic Psalter varies but little from it.
1
'Qui enim Scripturas ex Hebraea lingua in linguam Graecam verterunt
numerari possnnt, Latini autem interpretes nullo modo.' Aug. de doctrina
Christiana, lib. ii. cap. n. 'In ipsis autem interpretationibus Itala caeteris
praeferatur; nam est verborum tenacior cum perspicuitate sententiae.' //;.
lib. ii.
cap. 15.
2 '
Psalterium Romae dudnm positus emendaram et iuxta LXX
interpretes
licet cursim magna ex parte correxeram.' Prologiis in Psalterium Gallicum.
See also Prologtts in Psalterium Romamun '
Legi litteras Apostolatus tin
:
poscentis ut secundum simplicitatem LXX

interpretum canens psalmograpmim
interpretari festinem propter fastidium Romanorum, ut ubi obscuritas impedit
apertius et latine trahatur sensus.'
H h
466 Appendix.
in a few years the text had become so corrupted
(c) But
through the carelessness of copyists, that St. Jerome was induced
to make another and more complete revision, in which he
attempted to represent at once readings found in the LXX but

not in the Hebrew, and those found in the Hebrew but omitted
by the LXX, the former being indicated by an obelus, the latter
by an asterisk. His Hebrew readings however he did not draw
directly from the Hebrew text, but from Theodotion's version ".
This second revision by Jerome is the Gallican Psalter, which in
the course of time found its way into general use in the Western
Church. the version of the Vulgate. Jt was called the

It is also
Gallican Psalter from being first received in the Gallican Church.

Walafrid Strabo, writing in the ninth century, says that it was then
sung by the Gauls and by some Germans ; and he mentions
2
Gregory of Tours as reputed to have introduced it into Gaul But .
Mabillon doubts this being the fact, because Gregory of Tours

quotes the old version, which appears in the Psalter of St. Ger-
main, still preserved in the Paris National Library. He there-
fore believes that the Gallican Psalterwas adopted into Gaul
between the time of Gregory and of Walafrid 3 Probably its .
acceptance was gradual. Its use also spread into Italy, but only
partially, for it could not have become the rule even in the
fourteenth century, when Urban V
authorized its adoption by
the Abbey of Casino and, according to Zaccaria, the Roman
:
Psalter continued in use in Rome and its suburbicarian Churches

within a radius of forty miles from the city down to the pontifi-
cate of Pius V, which lasted from 1566 to 1572. This Pope
prescribed the general use of the Gallican Psalter,' but the Roman
1 '
Notet sibi unusquisque vel iacentem lineam vel radiantia signa, id est
obelos vel asteriscos. Et ubicunque. viderit virgulam praecedentem, ab ea
usque ad duo puncta quae iinpressimus, sctat in LXX
interpretibus plus haberi ;
ubi autem stellae similitudinem perspexerit, de Hebraeis voluminibus additum
noverit aeque usque ad duo puncta iuxta Theodotionis dumtaxat editionem."
Prologus in Psalierittm.
2
Psalmos autem cum secundum
'
LXX interpretes Romani adhuc habeant,
Galli et Germanorum aliqui secundum emend ationem, quam Hieronymus pater
de LXX
editione composuit, Psalterium cantant quam Gregorius, Turonensis
;
episcopus, a patribus Romanis mutuatam, in Galliamm dicitur ecclesias trans-

tulisse.' Walafrid. Strabo, de Rebus eccksiasticis, c. 25.
3
Mabillon, de Cursu Gallicano, ii.
Appendix. 467
was still retained at St. Peter's, Rome, at Milan, and at St.
Mark's, Venice; also in the Mozarabic rite

Spain. in The
Gallican Psalter, there can be little doubt, passed from Gaul into
England; but as to the precise period when this took place,
nothing can be affirmed with certainty. Hody states that it was
received by the Churches of Britain and Ireland before the
coming of Augustine but we know too little of the condition of

;
those Churches to justify us in accepting this conclusion we ;
have already seen that Mabillon disputes the fact of the Gallican
Psalter being received even in Gaul before that epoch and in all :
probability the ancient Irish and British Churches in their isolated
position would adhere to the use of the old Psalter or the
Roman, whichever they used, with the same tenacity which they
showed in clinging to their own peculiar customs respecting the
tonsure and the time of keeping Easter. That the Gallican
Psalter obtained to some extent in England as early as the tenth
century is shown by the fact of there being extant even at the

present day two manuscript copies ofit, both written in England
at that epoch Salisbury 150 and Lambeth 427; and there are
several copies, also English MSS., of the succeeding century.
But the Roman Psalter must also have been used in England,
at least in the diocese of Canterbury, previous to the Norman
invasion, probably as late as that event. We cannot suppose
that St. Augustine coming from Rome, where the Roman Psalter
was in use at the time of his mission, would fail to bring it with
him, and to continue his accustomed use of it. Wanley relates
too,on the authority of a MS. written in the reign of Henry V
by a monk of St. Augustine's, Canterbury, that two Psalters were
placed at that time on the altar of the abbey church, which
together with other valuable presents had been sent by Gregory
the Great to St. Augustine. The MS. in Wanley's time had been
transferred to the library of Trinity College, Cambridge, and no
doubt is still there l We
might expect therefore to find that the
.
Roman Psalter obtained more or less in the Church founded by

St.
Augustine. And we have evidence that this was the case.
Among the Cotton MSS. at the British Museum is a Roman
1
Humfredi Wanleii, librorum veterum septcntrionaHiim , . .
catalogus,
Oxon. 1725, pp. 221, 222.
Hh 2,
468 Appendix.
Psalter, Vesp. A i, written about A.D. 700, and written it is
believed at St. Augustine's Abbey, to which itformerly belonged.

Another Roman Psalter somewhat later of the early part of
the tenth century is preserved among the Royal MSS. in our
National Library Reg. 2. B. v ; it was once the property of Arch-
bishop Cranmer, whose autograph it bears, and appears from
internal evidence to have had its original home in some Kentish
monastery, where probably it was written : it is certainly an

English MS. A third, also of the tenth century, is to be found
in the Bodleian Junius 27 that this is a Roman Psalter is
:
evident not only from the text of the Psalter itself, but from the
Kalendar, which is distinctly Roman in substance with the
addition of a few Gallican festivals, and the obit of Alfred and
the commemoration of St. Augustine ; it was clearly written in
England, and the notice of St. Augustine would seem to point to

Canterbury or some Kentish monastery as its birthplace. A
fourth Roman Psalter, likewise written in England and not
improbably at Winchester, is Cam-
in the University Library at
bridge Ff. i. 23 : thisMS. shows that the use of the Roman

was not extinct
Psalter at the Norman Conquest, for according to
Wanley it was executed a little before that event. But the

Gallican Psalter must have found its way to Christ Church,
Canterbury, by the beginning of the eleventh century ; for the

Canute Psalter so called because written in the time of Canute
which contains the Gallican version of the Psalms, appears to
have belonged to that Church it is now in the Arundel collec-
:
tion at the British Museum, numbered 155. And we have

further evidence of the two versions co-existing at Christ Church,
Canterbury, the later possibly gradually superseding the earlier,

in the magnificent triple Psalter at Trinity College, Cambridge,
which was written by one Eadwin, a monk of Christ Church,

about the time of Stephen. This book contains the three
Psalters of Jerome, the Roman, Gallican, and Hebraic. Thus it
appears that in England between the coming of Augustine and

the Norman Conquest the Roman and Gallican Psalters were
both extant side by side, and were both used, possibly struggled
together for the mastery. It may be the Roman was never used
in the Anglo-Saxon Church except in the diocese of Canterbury :

Appendix. 469
but of this we cannot be certain. That the Gallican ultimately

prevailed and became the Psalter of the English Church we
know from being the version of the Sarum Breviary.
the fact of its
was not received into use in Spain

Lastly, the Gallican Psalter
until the year 1091, when it was substituted generally in the
Churches of that country for the Roman Psalter, which they had
previously used in accordance with the Mozarabic or ancient
national Office. This change, which was opposed to the wishes
of the nation, was principally brought about by Alphonso VI,
king of Castile and Leon, who was influenced in favour of the

Gallican Office by his wife Constance, daughter of Robert, duke
of Burgundy. First he solicited the Pope, according to Roderic
Toletanus, 'ut in Hispaniis, omisso Toletano, Romanum sen

Gallicanum officium servaretur y and then he enforced obedience
to the papal missive by threats of death and confiscation. And,
when the change was completed, to cite the same authority.
'
cunctis flentibus et dolentibus inolevit proverbium :
Quo volunt
reges, vadunt leges. Et ex tune Gallicanum officium, tarn ///
psalterio quam in nunquam ante susceptum,

aliis, fuit in Hispaniis
observatum V These words make it perfectly clear however
paradoxical the statement may sound
considering that Gregory the
Seventh is generally said to have introduced the Roman use into
Spain that the change really effected in obedience to him
was as regards the daily Offices the substitution of the Gallican
Psalter, which was then said in France, for the Roman Psalter,
which hitherto had been used in Spain and was still used in
Rome and the suburbicarian Churches arid in Italy generally.

Otherwise there would have been no change of Psalter. The
ritualimposed upon the Spaniards in reference to the daily Offices
as well as the Mass was in point of fact that then in use in
France. It was this which especially roused their hostility, the
national pride being touched in the most tender point. The

contest was looked upon as lying between the Toletan Office
and the Gallican Office. And the two Offices, described by
1
Roderic was Archbishop of Toledo in the thirteenth century, and wrote
a work, de rebus Hispaniae. The quotation is given by Pinius, Tractatus
Historico-Chronologicus de Liturgia antiqua Hisfanicn, Rome, 1740, vi. 4.
2
Ibid. vi. 6.
470 Appendix.
'
Frances and
' '
Roderic as el officio Toledano,' are said
el officio
to have been submitted to the tests of a duel between two
champions and of fire, the Toletan in both cases proving vic-

torious. Still the Mozarabic rite, though thus abolished generally
inSpain towards the close of the eleventh century, continued to

be observed in six parish churches of Toledo as late as the
thirteenth century, notwithstanding repeated endeavours of the
Roman See to effect its extinction. But by the latter part of the
fifteenth century it had fallen into almost complete desuetude
and neglect even in these Churches; and Cardinal Ximenes,
finding it in this moribund condition on his accession to the
archbishopric of Toledo in 1495, at once set himself to provide

a remedy. For this purpose he not only caused the Mozarabic
Missal and Breviary to be printed and edited, but also erected
a Chapel at the west end of Toledo Cathedral, called the Chapel
of Corpus Christi, wherein their ritual might be daily celebrated
in perpetuity by a college of thirteen priests, founded and
endowed by him. There the Mozarabic Office is celebrated to
this day and there, as part and parcel of it, the Roman Psalter
:
is still sung, as it is also at St. Peter's, Rome, and at Milan ;
whether it is still used at St. Mark's, Venice, I am unable to

l
say .
The Hebraic Psalter is Jerome's

(d) translation from the
Hebrew, which he made some time after his other versions. It
has never been used in Church Offices.
The Athanasian Creed being very commonly found in MS.
Latin Psalters owing to its being recited as a Canticle or Psalm
in Church Offices, it is
clearly of importance in reference to its
history to note to what particular version the several Psalters, in

which it
appears, belong. We
shall thus obtain a clue by which
we may in some degree ascertain in what Churches and countries

itwas received and used, and at what dates. But we can only
expect to find it in Roman and Gallican Psalters. In the very
few MSS. of the Old Latin version which are extant it does not
1
For the history of the Mozarabic rite, see especially the work of Pinius,
ij
noted, and referred to above also Praefatio Alexandri Lesleii in Littirgia
;
Mozaralrica, Migne, Patrol. Lat. torn. Ixxxv; also Florez, Espaiia Sagrada,
torn. iii. Madrid, 1754.
Appendix. 471
appear, nor could we expect to find it in them, as that Psalter,
though necessarily the had passed or was passing out of

first used,
use at the time when the Quicunque began to be recited in the
Office. Nor can we look for it in a Hebraic Psalter for the reason
above mentioned, that it was never used in Divine worship,
except in MSS. containing also a Roman or Galilean Psalter
or both.
Numerous MSS. are extant containing two or more of these
Latin versions of the Psalter. Among them may be mentioned
Paris Bibliotheque Nationale, Latin 2195 a MS. written at
Tournay A.D. 1105 containing the Gallican, Roman, and

Hebraic, and in addition the LXX
version in Latin characters in
parallel columns ;
another quadruple Psalter now at Bamberg,
containing the same four versions, written A.D. 909 the magnifi- ;
cent Eadwin Psalter of the twelfth century at Trinity College,

Cambridge, containing the Gallican, Roman, and Hebraic and ;
in the Bodleian Library, Laud. Bibl. 35, also a triple Psalter,

Gallican,Roman and Hebraic, assigned to the tenth century ; in
the Cathedral Library at Salisbury, No. 180, a double Psalter,
Gallican and Hebraic, written in France in the tenth century.
Manuscripts of the Roman and Old Latin Psalters are necessarily

scarce the latter especially so compared with those of the
Gallican version, which are very abundant owing to its coming
into more general use in the Middle Ages. Some MSS. of the
Roman Psalter have been already mentioned a copy of the Old :
Latin appears in a double Psalter belonging to the cathedral at

Verona, and described by Blanchini as written before the seventh
century, the other version being that of the Septuagint in Latin
characters
:
A
Quincuplex Psalterium, comprising the Gallican,
.
Roman, Hebraic, and Vetus versions, with a fifth called Con-

ciliatum^ and constructed by a harmony of the Gallican and
Hebraic, was printed by Stephens at Paris in 1509 and 1513,
being edited with a preface and expositions by Jacobus Faber
Stapulensis and the same book was reprinted at Caen in 1515
;
by Peter Olivier. Faber does not specify the MSS. from which
his text is derived :
but, as regards the three Hieronymian
versions, it is identical with that of the Paris Psalter previously
1
Blanchini Vindiciae Canonicarum Scrlpturartim, Romae, 1740.
472 Appendix.
noticed Latin 2195, if we may judge from the collation of the
facsimile of it, produced among the publications of the Palaeo-
graphical Society, vol. iii.
plate 156.
E.
The Text of the Athanasian Creed.

The text as it appears in Waterland's
Critical History, with
various readings from the following MSS. Paris, Bibliotheque :
Nationale, Latin 13159, 4858, 1451, 3848 B, 2076; Rome, the

Vatican Library, Vat. 82, 84, and Palat. 574; Milan, Ambrosian
Library, O. 212; British Museum,. Bib. Reg. 2. B. v, and Cotton
Galba A. xviii ;
Oxford Bodleian Library, Canonici Patr. Lat. 88 ;
Cambridge University Library, F. f. i. 23 ; Cambridge, Corpus

Christi College, Parker 272. O. 5 and 391; Salisbury, Cathedral
Library, 150 ;
the Utrecht Psalter.
Ihave purposely omitted collations from the Treves fragment,
because it cannot be regarded as an authority for the text,
inasmuch it is not a copy of the Creed nor of a
as portion of it,
' 1
but of a portion of a sermon delivered at the Traditio Symboli,

in which the preacher adapts, but with large variations, the
clauses relating to the Incarnation.
Paris 4858, it will be recollected, contains only the commence-
ment of the Creed, ending with the words ' non tres aeterni,' the
deficiency being caused by the mutilation of the MS.
In some of these MSS. the Creed bears no title, viz. the
Ambrosian MS. O. 212; Paris 13159 and 4858; Cambridge
University, F. f. i. 23, Parker 391. It should be. noted that in
the Parker MS. the Canticles and Lord's Prayer and Apostles'
Creed all appear without any title. In the other MSS. the title is
as follows : Paris 1451, Exemplar fidei chatolice sancti Atanasii

episcopi alexandrine ecclesie ; Paris 3848 B, Fides Sancti Atha-
nasii Episcopi Paris 2076, Fides dicta a Sancto Athanasio
Episcopo ;
Vat. 82, Fides catholica quam sanctus Athanasius
dictavit Vat. 84, Fides catholica edita a Beato Athanasio episcopo ;
Palat. 574, Fides catholica beati Atanasi British Museum,
episcopi
Bib. Reg. 2. B. v, Hymnus athanasii de fide trinitatis quern tu
Appendix. 473
concelebrans discutienter intellege; British Museum, Cotton Galba

A. xviii, Fides sancti Athanasii Alexandrini ; Bodleian, Canonici
Patr. Lat. 88, Fides Anathasii episcopi; Parker 272. O. 5, Fides
catholica; Salisbury 150, Hymnus athanasii de fide Trinitatis

quern tu concelebrans discutienter intellege ; Utrecht Psalter, Fides
Catholicam (sic).
Abbreviations used in the notes : B. M. for British Museum ;
B. L. for Bodleian Library; C. U. L. for Cambridge University

Library ; S. C. L. for Salisbury Cathedral Library ; and U. P. for
Utrecht Psalter.
1.
Quicunque vult salvus esse, ante omnia opus est ut teneat
Catholicam Fidem.
2. Quam nisi
quisque integram inviolatamque servaverit, absque
dubio in aeternum peribit.
3. Fides autem Catholica haec est, ut unum Deum in Trinitate
et Trinitatem in Unitate veneremur.
4. Neque confundentes personas, neque substantiam sepa-
rantes.
5. Alia est enim persona Patris, alia Filii, alia Spiritus Sancti.
6. Sed Patris et Filii et Spiritus Sancti una est divinitas,
aequalis gloria, coaeterna maiestas.

7. Qualis Pater, talis Filius, talis et Spiritus Sanctus.
Ver. i. Milan O. 212 esse salvus. After opus est B. M. Reg. 2.

salmis esse :
B. v. adds enim. Catholicam: Paris 13159 chatolicam.

2. quisque: Milan O. 212 quis. absqiie diibio is omitted by Paris 4858.
3. ut is omitted by Paris 2076. Trinitatem Paris 13159 and 2076:
trinitate, the mark of contraction above the e being omitted, doubtless through
inadvertence.
4. confundentes: Milan O. 212 confudentes, Paris 13159 and 1451, B.M.
Reg. 2. B. v, and Cotton Galba A. 18; also C.U. L. F. f. i. 23, confundantes.

substantiam Paris 4858 substantia, omitting the mark of contraction.
:
enim: Paris 2076 ergo.

5. Milan O. 212 inserts persona before Filii and
Spiritus. Vat. 84 inserts et before Spiritus.
6. sed Patris et Filii et Spiritus Sancti were omitted originally in Milan
O. 211, but have been inserted above the line by another but still early hand;
onlyyf// is -written
for_/?/. The ink is so pale that the four last words are
almost illegible. The omission is clearly due to inadvertence, being caused by
the repetition of the words Spiritus Sancti. coaeterna: Paris 4858 and 1451
quoaeterna.
7. In Vat. 84 et is omitted. In Parker 391 it seems to be erased.
474 Appendix.
8. Increatus Pater, increatus Filius, increatus et Spiritus
Sanctus.
9. Immensus Pater, immensus Filius, immensus et Spiritus

Sanctus.
10. Aeternus Pater, aeternus Filius, aeternus et Spiritus
Sanctus.
ir. Et tamen non tres aeterni, sed unus aeternus.
12. Sicut non tres increati, nee tres immensi, sed unus in-
creatus et unus immensus.
13. Similiter, omnipotens Pater, omnipotens Filius, omnipotens

et Spiritus Sanctus.
14. Et tamen non tres omnipotentes, sed unus omnipotens.

15. Ita Deus Pater, Deus Filius, Dens et Spiritus Sanctus.
1 6. Et tamen non tres Dii, sed unus est Deus.
17. Ita Dominus Pater, Dominus Filius, Dominus et Spiritus
Sanctus.
8. et is omitted in Milan O. 212. It is also omitted in S. C,L. 150, but

there an appearance of erasure before Spiritus in the latter MS. In Vat. 84
is
it is omitted. In Parker 391 it seems to have been erased. This and the two
following verses in Paris 1451 stand thus: Aeternus Pater, aeternus Filius,
aeternus et Spiritus Sancius. Increatus Pater, increatus Filius, increatus et
Spiritus Sanctus. Inmensus Pater, inmensus Filitts, inmensus et Spii'itus
Sanctus, This reading clearly derives support from the received text of
verses n
and 12.
9. et isomitted in Milan O. 212, also in Vat. 84. In Parker 391 it seems
to have been erased.
10. et is omitted in Milan O. 212 ;
also in Vat. 84. In Parker 391 it seems
to have been erased.
12. unus increatus et unus immensus: Milan O. 212 unus inmensus et
unus increatzis. Paris 2076 has incretus.
13. et is omitted in Milan O. 212; also in Vat. 84. In Palat. 574 it was
evidently omitted originally, but there is a later insertion above of the symbol
it.
representing
14. tamen is omitted in Milan O. 212.
15. et is omitted in Milan O. 212 ; also in Vat. 84 and Canonici Pat. Lat. 88.
And as in ver. 13, it was
also omitted originally in Palat. 574, but the symbol
denoting it has been inserted later above the line. In Parker 391 it seems to
have been erased.
16. est is omitted in Milan O. 212 also in Paris 13159.
;
In Parker 391 it
seems to have been erased.
17. et is omitted in Milan O. 212 and Vat. 84; also it was omitted originally
in Palat. 574, but here again, as in vv. 13 and 15, the symbol denoting it has
been inserted later above the line. In Parker 391 it seems to have been erased.
Appendix. 475
1 8. Et tamen non tres Domini, sed unus est Dominus.

19. Quia sicut singillatim unamquamque personara et Deum
et Dominum confiteri Christiana veritate compellimur; ita tres
Deos aut Dominos dicere Catholica religione prohibemur.

20. Pater a nullo est factus, nee creatus, nee genitus.
21. Filius a Patre solo est, non factus, nee creatus, sed
genitus.
22. Spiritus Sanctus a Patre et Filio, non factus, nee creatus,
nee genitus est, sed procedens.
23. Unus ergo Pater, non tres Patres ;
unus Filius, non tres
Filii unus Spiritus Sanctus, non tres Spiritus Sancti.
24. Et in hac Trinitate nihil prius aut posterius, riihil maius

aut minus, sed totae tres personae coaeternae sibi sunt et co-
aequales.
25. Ita ut per omnia, sicut iam supra dictum est, et unitas in
Trinitate, et Trinitas in unitate veneranda sit.

26. Qui vult ergo salvus esse, ita de Trinitate sentiat.
Milan O. 212. The whole verse was omitted originally

18. est is omitted in
in Canonici Patr. Lat. 88, but has been added in the margin. In Parker 391
est seems to have been erased.
19. sicut is omitted in Paris ^3159. personam et Deum: Paris 13159 and
1451, Cotton Galba A. xviii, B. M. Reg. 2. B. v, Canonici Patr. Lat. 88,
C. U.L. F. f. i. 23, and U. P. personam Dettm omitting et. personam'. Paris
2076 persona, omitting the mark of contraction. Christiana: Paris 13159
Christiane. Dominum in Palat. 574 nos has been written above it by a later
:
hand, and deum appears to have been similarly altered, atit Dominos Paris :
I
45 I 3848 B, and U.P. insert tres after aut. dicere Paris 3848 B did. :
20. After creatus a word has been erased in Paris 2076.

22. estomitted in Paris 1451 and 2076, C.U.L. F. f. i. 23, S. C. L. 150,
is
and U.P. After procedens Milan O. 212 &&&S patri et filio co-aeternus est.
23. Sancttis is omitted in Paris 13159. That MS. reads tris for tres here,
as well as in ver. 19.
24. hac: Paris 1451 ac, but h has been written above by a corrector.
co-aclernae : Paris 13159 quoeterne, Paris 1451 quohaeternae. coaequales:
Paris 13159 quoequales.
25. supra: Paris 13159 superitts, but supra has been written above by
a corrector, unitas in Trinitate et Trinitas in imitate: Milan O. 212, Paris
I
3 I 59 I
45 I > 2076, Vat. 82 and 84, B. M. Reg. 2. B. v, Canonici Patr. Lat.
88, C.U.L. F. f. i. 23, Parker 272 O. 5, and U.P. all read trinitas in unitate et
itnitas in trinitate Palat. 574 has trinitas in iinitatem et unitas in trinitatein,
;
but the m both in unitatem and trinitatem seems to be an after-addition.

26. ergo in Palat. 574 is written above the line, no doubt omitted originally.
476 Appendix.
27. Sed necessarium est ad aeternam salutem, ut Incarna-

tionem quoque Domini nostri lesu Christi fideliter credat.
28. Est ergo fides recta, ut credamus et confiteamur, quia Domi-
nus noster lesus Christus, Dei Filius, Deus pariter et homo est.
29. Deus est ex substantia Patris ante saecula genitus, homo

ex substantia matris in saeculo natus.
30. Perfectus Deus, perfectus homo ex anima rationali et
humana carne subsistens.
31. Aequalis Patri secundum divinitatem, minor Patre se-
cundum humanitatem.
32. Qui licet Deus sit et homo, non duo tamen sed unus est
Christus.
33. Unus autem, non conversione divinitatis in carnem, sed

adsumptione humanitatis in Deum.
27. est is omitted in Paris 131 59. salutem is repeated in Paris 2076. The
same MS. has Incarnatione, the mark of contraction over e being omitted.
quoque was omitted originally in Palat. 574, but has been inserted above.
After Christi, Canonici Pair. Lat. 88 adds unusquisque.
28. Paris 1451 and 2076, also S. C. L. 150, insert et before Deus. pariter is
omitted in Paris 13159 and 1451, Vat. 82 and 84, C. U.L. F. f. i. 23, Parker
391, B. M. Cotton Galba A. xviii, and U. P., but in Paris 13159 and Parker 391
it has evidently been erased, as appears by the hiatus after Deus. In Palat. 574
there has been an attempt to erase it.
29. ante saecula genitus omitted in the text of Milan O. 212, but written in
the margin in another hand, et is inserted before homo in Paris 13159, 1451,
2076, Vat. 82 and 84, Palat. 574, B. M. Reg. 2. B. v, and Galba A. xviii,
Canonici Patr. Lat. 88, Parker 272. O. 5, S.C. L. 150, and U. P. est is added
after homo in Milan O. 212, Paris 13159, 1451, 2076, Vat 82 and 84, Palat.
574, B. M. Reg. 2. B. v, and Cotton Galba A. xviii, Canonici Patr. Lat. 88,
Parker 272 O. 5, and U.P. In Parker 391 there are evidences of erasure both
before and after homo, from which it would appear that et homo est was the
original reading, in saeculo Paris 13159, B. M. 2. B. v, and C. U. L. F. f.

:
1.23, in saecula ; 574 in saecuhtm.

Palat.
30. rationali: Milan O. 212 rationabili', Paris 13159 and Palat. 574
rationale, humanacarne: S.C.L. 150 humane^ carn$, Paris 1451 umana.
31. In Palat. 574 the letter j has been added by a later hand to Patri.
sectmdum: Paris 1451 sedttm, the error being the result possibly of the
omission of the mark of contraction over e. Patre: Paris 13159, 1451, and
2076, B. M. Cotton Galba A. xviii, and \l.T?.patri.
33. conversione: Milan O. 212 evidently had originally conversation, and
this is the reading of S.C.L. 150. In the former MS. the letters at have been
erased, leaving a hiatus between s and i in the latter a corrector has written
;
the letter i above the s; Palat. 574 reads fonversionem, i.e. conversione with
Appendix. 477
34. Unus omnino, non confusione substantiae, sed unitate

personae.
35. Nam sicut anima rationalis et caro unus est homo, ita
Deus et homo unus est Christus.
36. Qui passus est pro salute nostra, descendit ad inferos,

tertia die resurrexit a mortuis.
37. Adscendit ad caelos, sedet ad dexteram Patris, inde ven-

turus iudicare vivos et mortuos.
38. Ad cuius adventum omnes homines resurgere habent cum

corporibus suis, et reddituri sunt de factis propriis rationem.
the mark of contraction over the final e : this may possibly be by the later
hand which has clearly made several additions in this MS. ; C.U.L. F. f.
23 i.
has confusione. carnem and Deitm: Milan O. 212, Paris 13159, 1451,
3848 B, 2076, and 2341, B. M. Reg. 2. B. v, and Cotton Gaiba A. xviii,
Canonici Patr. Lat. 88, Parker 272. O. 5, S. C. L. 150, and U. P. all read carne and
deo. adsumptione Paris 13159 adsuptione, probably owing to the inadvertent
\
omission of the mark of contraction over the letter u ; Palat. 574 read originally
adsumptionem, but the final m has been erased.
34. imitate personae: Paris 1451 and 2076 imitatis persone, but rmitatis
has been partially erased in the latter MS.
35. rationalis: Milan O. 212 rationabilis.
36. salute nostra Paris 2076 sahitem nostrum, the mark of contraction
:
being inadvertently added over the final e and a U. P. has saluta. tertia die
;
:
omitted in Milan O. 212, Paris 13159, 1451, and 2076, Palat. 574, B. M.
Cotton Galba A. xviii, and Parker 391. In the last MS. the words appear to
have been erased, resurrexit: Milan O. 212, Paris 1451 and 2341 surrexit;
this also was evidently the original reading in Palat. 574, but re has been
added above by a later hand.
37. sedet: Milan O. 212, Paris 13159, 1451, 3848 B, 2076, B. M. Reg. 2.
B. v, Parker 391, and U. P. read sedit. ad dexteram Paris 13159 a dexteram.:
After ad dexteram, Paris 13159, 1-151, 3848 B, and 2076, Vat. 82 and 84,
B. M. Reg. 2. B. v, and Cotton Galba A. xviii, B. L., Canonici Patr. Lat. 88,
C.U.L. F. f. i. 23, Parker 391 and 272. O. 5, S.C.L. 150, and U.P.addZtez;
the same MSS. after Patris add omnipotentis. In Palat. 574 Dei has been
inserted above Patris, but was evidently not part of the original text. In the
same MS. the words omnipotentis, Inde venturus iudicare vivos et mortuos
are omitted from the text, but they are written, apparently in a different hand,
in a note at the foot of the page. Inde venturus iudicare vivos et mortuos
were probably omitted through mere inadvertence, but in all probability omni-
potentis was absent from the text which the copyist followed, as well as Dei.
After, venturus Vat. 82 and 84, B. M. Reg. 2. B. v, and S.C.L. 150 add est.
For et mortuos Milan O. 212 reads ac mortuos.
38. cum: Milan O. 212 in. Waterland asserts that the words resurgere
habent citm corporibiis suis et are wanting in the Milan Ambrosian MS., but in
478 Appendix.
39. Et qui bona egerunt, ibunt in vitam aeternam; qui vero

mala, in ignem aeternum.
40. Haec est Fides Catholica, quam nisi quisque ndeliter
firmiterque crediderit, salvus esse non poterit.
F.
Copy of the first Commentary on the Athanasian Creed

contained in Troyes 804, and entitled, Expositio fidei '
catholicae!
Quicunque vult salvus esse, ante omnia opus est zit teneat catholi-
cam fidem. Fides dicitur credulitas sive credentia Catholica :
vero universalis vocatur, quod ab universa ecclesia tenere oportet.

Ecclesia autem est congregatio fidelium, sive conventus fideiium
populi. Fides vera haec est, ut credamus et confiteamur unum et
verum Deum in Trinitate et Trinitatem in

Unitate ; neque con-
fundentes personas ut Sabellius hereticus, qui ipsum dixit esse

Patrem persona quern et Filium, ipsum Filium quern et
in
Spiritum Sanctum. Fides autem catholica est nee personas con-

fundere neque Deitatem separare, quoniam tres personae, una
vero Divinitas, Deitatis.Est enim gignens, genitus, et procedens :
gignens Pater, qui genuit Filium ; Filius vero est a Patre ;

est
Spiritus autem Sanctus nee genitus, quia non est Filius, neque
ingenitus quoniam non
est Pater, sed ex Patre et Filio procedens.
Quae Pater videlicet et Filius et Spiritus Sanctus,

tres personae,
consubstantiales sibi sunt et co-aeternae et co-aequales atque co-
operatores, de quibus in Psalmo scriptum est : Verbo Domini
this, as in some other particulars, he was obviously misled by Muratori's

collation.
39. ibunt: Palat. 574 hibtmt. Before qtii B. M.

Reg. 2. B. v, C.U.L. F. f.
I. added above qzti. vero is
23, and U.P. insert et; in Palat. 574 it has been
omitted in Milan O. 212, Paris 13159. and U.P. mala: Paris 2076 inaluni.
After aeternam Paris 1451 adds erunt in resiirrectionem vit%; and just before
erunt there appear the letters sa with a line drawn through them, as if the
scribe had begun to write some word commencing with those letters, as salvi
or salvabuntur.
40. Fides in Paris 1451 is written twice. The same MS. reads chatholica
Appendix. 479
caeli firmati sunt, et spiritu oris eius omnes virtus eorum \ In
persona quippe Domini Pater intellegitur, in Verbo vero eius

Filius accipitur, in spiritu autem oris eius ipse Spiritus Sanctus
designatur. Quae tres personae deitatis et singillatim tres sunt et

singulariter substantiae 2
unum existant, non essentiae divise.
3
,
sicut Arrius impie predicare ausus est, qui sicut tres personas in
Deum 4
esse credidit, ita et tres substantias commentatus est '".
Filium Dei minorem esse dixit Patri, non de substantia eius
genitum, sed ex nichilo temporaliter creatum ; Spiritum autem

Sanctum similiter non creatorem sed creaturam plus quam
minorem quam Filium, et Patris et Filii ministrum asserunt G et ,
ideo non creatorem cum Patre et Filio neque verum Deum

eundem Spiritum Sanctum, sed creaturam, ut dictum antea, pre-
dicare ausus est ; quasi quosdam gradus impietatis suae in Deum,
qui unus Patrem scilicet, ut aurum, Filium vero,
est, arbitratus,
7
quasi argentum, Spiritum autem Sanctum eramentum Nos .
autem impietatem eius anathematizantes credimus et confitemur

aliam esse personam Patris, quern ingenitum ideo appellamus,
quia a nullo est genitus, aliam personam Filii, quia Patre solus
est genitus, aliam vero personam Spiritus Sancti, qui neque in-
1 2
In the Vulgate, Ps. xxxii. 6. So the MS.
3
e with a cedilla is often written for ae.
*
Several times in this Commentary the accusative case is used where we
'
should have expected the ablative duas voluntates atque operationes in
' '
singularitatem personae non duos Christos neque duas personas ... in eum
credere oportet' and elsewhere. This note of barbarous Latinity appears in
other writings of the age in Paris 3836, a MS. of the eighth century, we have
:
'
'
omnia facta sunt sive quae in caelo sive que in terrain ;
and in Paris 1451,
a MS. belonging to the commencement of the ninth century, 'in nicenum con-
cilium fuerunt damnati arrius et fotinus et sabellius.'
5
In the corresponding passage in Fortunatns' Commentary we have
'
tres
' '
substantias esse mentitur.' Commentatus est gives an equally good sense

invented, devised.
Asserwnt is probably a copyist's error for asseruit.
7 '
Ducange, Glossarium sub voce aeramentwn.

'
Opus ex acre confectum
The analogy of the three substances of gold, silver, and brass, as representing
the Arian doctrine of the Trinity, is found in St. Augustine, de Agone Christiana,
lib. i. cap. xv, and in the Synodical Epistle of St. Athanasius and the Council
of Alexandria held A. D. 362 :
rj uiffnep Siatyupovs oiivias, wairfp eart. xpvabs
T) npyvpos ^ ôX/cos, OUTW ical abrol Xtywaiv. S. Athanasii Tomus ad Antio-
chenos, 5 ; Opera, torn. i.
p. 773, edit. 1698.
480 Appendix.
genitus, ut Pater, neque genitus, ut Filius, sed ex Patre Filioque

procedit. Et in his tribus personis, Patris videlicet et Filii et
Spiritus Sancti, una est essentia divinitatis, aequalis gloria, co-

aeterna maiestas, unita potestas communisque operatic. Qua/is
Pater, talis Filius, talis et Spiritus Sanctus. Increatus Pater,
increatus Filius, increatus et Spiritus Sanctus ; hoc est, a nullo
creatus. Inmensus Pater, inmensus Filius, inmensus et Spiritus
Sanctus :
quia metiri omnino non possunt.
Incircumscriptus
Pater, incircumscriptus Filius, incircumscriptus Spiritus Sanctus ;
quia non loco continentur, sed ubique presentes existunt. In-
visibilis Pater, invisibilis Filius, invisibilis et Spiritus Sanctus;
quia videri a nullo queunt: Aeternus Pater, aeternus Filius,

aeternus et Spiritus Sanctus ; non tamen tres aeterni, sed unus
aeternus, neque initium habens, neque fine concluditur. Omni-
potens Pater, omnipotens Filius, omnipotens et Spiritus Sanctus ;
non tamen tres omnipotentes, sed unus omnipotens, quia omnia que
vult potest. Hoc enim non potest, quod non vult, hoc est, quod
non expedit. Veritas est, quia falli omnino non potest. Virtus
est, quoniam omnino non potest. Vita est, quia mori
infirmari
nullo modo potest, Deus Pater, Deus Filius, Deus et Spiritus
Sanctus ; non tamen tres dii, sed unus est Deus. Deus enim
nomen est potestatis, non proprietatis. Proprium nomen est
Patri, quod Pater est ; proprium nomen est Filio, quod Filius est ;
et proprium nomen est Spiritus Sancti Spiritus Sanctus. Ita

Dominus Pater, Dominus Filius, Dominus et Spiritus Sanctus ;
non tamen tres Domini, sed unus est Dominus. Dominus autem
ideo appellatur pro eo quod omnem creaturam caeli ac terre.
dominetur. Sicut enim singillatim, ut dictum est, unam quamque
personam et Deum et Dominum digne confiteri Christiana veritate

compellimur, ita tres Deos vel tres Domino s credere, ut predicare,
auctoritate divina et ratione veritatis prohibemur. Si autem quis-
libetquempiam ex doctoribus interrogare voluerit, quid sit Pater ;
ratione veritatis et auctoritate divina, ut dictum est ; respondere
illi necesse est, Deus et Dominus. Similiter si inquirat, quid est
Filius ; respondere illi oportet, Deus et Dominus, sicut et Pater. Si
autem ab eo, quid

sciscitetur sit et Spiritus Sanctus ;
similiter ei
respondere convenit, Deus etDominus, quemadmodum Pater et

Filius. Sed in his tribus personis non tres Deos neque tres
Appendix. 481
Dominos, sed unum Deum et unum Dominum esse confirmet. Unus

ergo Pater, qui nunquam fuit sine Filio, non tres Patres. Umis est
Filius co-aeternus Patri, non tres Filii, Unus est Spiritus Sanctus
ex Patre et Filio procedens, non tres Spiritus Sancti, neque posterior
aut inferior vel minor Patri et Filio, a quibus procedit. Etin hac
sancta Trinitate deitatis nichil prius nichil posterius nichilque
inferius aut inaequale, sed totg tres personae, ut dictum est, co-
aeternt: sibi sunt et quo-aequales et consubstantiales atque insepa-
rabiles. Sed quia omnipotens Deus ita invisibilis est ut a mortali

creatura, id est, ab homine videri omnino, sicuti est, non possit,
idcirco a mundi
creatura quantulacnnque comparatione ad Deum
1
nobis adtrahere convenit apostolica auctoritate informati , qua
dicit : Invisibilia enim ipsius mundi creatura que facta sunt intel-
lecta conspiduntur, sempiterna quoqiie ehis virtus Solis, qui

2
. cum
sit unus in natura, tres habere videtur efficientias ; id est, sol,
splendor, et calor. Tria quidem vocabula, sed una est.

res
Splendor quoque illuminat, calor vero exurit. Haec duo ita in

sole naturaliter consistunt, ut unum absque alio, et utrumque sine
tertio esse non possint ; quia neque splendor sine calore, neque
calor sine splendore, neque utrumque, id est, splendor et calor sine
3 4
splendore fieri possunt .
Quod etiam de natura ignis prudens
1
So the MS.
In this quotation from Rom. i. 20 the copyist has inadvertently omitted
2
the preposition a before mundi and per ea before qne. Something too must
have been omitted before salts.
3 '
for sole,'
Obviously the error being attributable, like the omissions just
noticed, to the carelessness of the copyist.

4
This illustration of the doctrine of the Trinity is found also in the Com-
mentary attributed to 'Fortunatus, which has, according to the Milan and Paris
'
copies, sol, candor, calor tria sunt vocabula, et tria unum.'
;
It is found also
in the Rhythms of S. Ephrem Syrus Look at the sun in his height, which is
:
'
thought to be one; descend, and look, and behold in his light, a second; try,
and and search his heat, a third. They are like, and yet not like one to
feel,
another. Light also and the sun are individual subsistences there are in
. . . ;
them three kinds, mingled in a threefold way, himself, and also the light, and
the heat the third, dwelling one in the other, and agreeing without grudging.'
Rhythm xi. I Select Works of S. Ephrem, Oxford translation, p. 232. Also

;
in lihythm Ixxiii. i: 'Lo, there is a similitude between the sun and the
Father, the radiance and the Son, the heat and the Holy Ghost ;
and though
it be one, a Trinity is beheld in it.' Ibid. p. 339. On the first of these
passages the learned translator and editor remarks in a note,

'
The use of the
i i
482 Appendix.
contemplator colligere potest. Ita Pater et Filius et Spiritus

Sanctus tres proculdubio extant personae, sed individua maiestate
Deitatis et gloria aeternitatis. Fides autem catholica haec est, ut
credamus et confiteamur, Dominus noster Ihesus Christtis Dei
quia
Patris est Filius^ Deus pariter et homo est l Deus scilicet ex
;
Patre sine initio, homo vero ex matre a certo initio, unus atque
idem Filius aequalis Patri secundwn Divinitatem^ minor
Dei ;
vero Patri iuxta humanitatem ; co-aeternus Patri in Divinitatem,
contemporalis vero matri erga humanitatem, consubstantialis

matri in assumptam humanitatem ; similis Patri per omnia secun-
dum Divinitatem, dissimilis vero omni creaturae, consimilis autem
nobis hominibus in humanitate, excelsior vero omni creaturae
caeli ac terrae; unus atque idem Ihesus Christus Dominus ac
redemptor noster. Cuius nominis aetimologia hec est. Ihesus

Ebreo sermone Latine salvator sive salutaris interpretatur.
Christus autem Hebraice Messias vocatur, Greca vero lingua
Christus dicitur, Latine vero unctus appellatur. Ihesus autem
ideo nuncupatur pro eo quod ipse salvum facit populum suum.
Christus autem secundum humanitatem ideo vocatur, quia Spiritu
Sancto a Patre unctus est, sicut ex ipsius Christi persona Esaias
1
Propheta ait :
Spiritus Domini super me } propter quod unxit me' ;
et in Psalmo Propheta ad ipsum Christum Dominum : Sedes ttia,
Deus, in saecuhim saeculi ; virga equitatis virga regni tui ; dilexisti

iustitiam et odisti iniquiiatem ; propterea imxit te Deus ; Deus
3
tuus, oleo letitiae pre consortilms tuis Unctus Deus, Filius Dei,
.
a Patre et Spiritu Sancto, non in Divinitatis essentia, sed in

humanitate assurnpta. Duas quippe in Christo credimus esse
naturas, duasque formas, duasque nativitates, duas etiam volun-
tates atque operationes in singularitatem personae. De prima
sun as furnishing by its light a type of the Father generating the Son is very
frequent indeed in the Fathers. The use made of it here and R. Ixxiii. i
is much less frequent : indeed, I am not able to furnish any other instance of
a passage exactly parallel, as they speak rather of the Holy Spirit, as Light of
Light, than as heat of Light.' The illustration being so rare, its appearance
in these two Commentaries is one proof among many of the close connexion
between them.
1
This Commentary, it will be observed, like that of Fortunatus,
passes over
the twenty-fifth, twenty-sixth, and twenty-seventh verses of the Creed.
2 3
Isai. Ixi. i. .,
In the Vulgate, Ps. xliv. 7, 8.
Appendix. 483
quippe nativitate eius, qu secundum Divinttatem ex Patre est,

David Propheta ex persona Patris ad Filium ait Ex utero ante :
luciferum genui te
1
Ex utero inquit, hoc est, de mea substantia ;
.
ante luciferum, id est, ante omnem creaturam. De secunda vero

generatione eius, qug iuxta humanitatem temporalis facta est,
beatus Paulus Apostolus sua nos informans auctoritate, At iibi
venit, inquit, plenitudo temporis, misit Deus Filiiim stttim, factum

ex muliere, factum sub lege, ut eos, qui sub lege erant, redimeret, -ut
adoptionem filiorum reciperemus'*. De prima generatione, qu

secundum Deitatem est, Esaias Propheta clamat Generationem :
eius quis enarrabit* ? De qug secundum

generatione autem eius,
carnem Mattheus Evangelista scripsit
est, Liber generations :
Ihesu Christi, filii David) filii Abraam*, De duabus vero volun-

tatibus in eo ipse sibi Dei Filius testis est, qui tempore passionis
suae Patrem efflagitans ait :
Pater, si fieri potest, transeat a me
5
calix iste ; verumtamen non sicut ego volo, sed sicut til Pater. ,
Similiter et de duabus operationibus qui nosse cupit, ex evan-

gelica predicatione plenius scire potest. Idcirco autem Dei
Filius, qui verus Deus est ex Patre, verus homo dignatus est fieri
ex matre ex anima rationabili et carne consistentibus suis in
,
singularitate persone., ut totum hominem ex anima rationabili et
carne mortali subsistente 7

, qui in Adam
peccando perierat, per
suam passionem ac mortem de mortis potestate redimeret, et per
resurrectionem suam aeternae vitae participem efficeret. Non
sicut Apollinaris hereticus predicare ausus est, qui eundem
J 2
In the Vulgate, Ps. cix. 3. Galat. iv. 4, 5.
3 4
Isai. liii. 8. S. Matt. i. i.
5
S. Matt. xxvi. 39.
The terms verus Deus,-vents homo are repeatedly used, it may be observed,
Fortunatus Commentary, in reference to our blessed Lord.
in this as well as the
It has been said that this terminology was not introduced till after the Adop-
tionist controversy,which may be assigned to the end of the eighth century.
The untruth of the assertion might be abundantly proved but it will be :
sufficient to quote two passages from so early a writer as St. Hilary of

Poictiers :
'
lesus Christus . . . homo ac Deus . . . habens in se et totum
'
verumque quod homo est, et totum verumque quod Deus est (lie Trin.fi. 19),
and Nescit vitam suam, nescit, qui Christum lesum ut verum Deum
'
ita et
verum hominem ignorat' (ibid. ix. 3).
7
The mark of contraction over the final e has been evidently omitted by an
'
oversight : with it the reading would have been subsistentem.'
I i 3
484 Appendix.
Filium *
animam non habuisse asseruit ;
hoc tamen rationabile ex-
istimans,quod Divinitas ei sufficeret pro ratione. Catholica vero
fides eundem Dei Filium Dominum ac redemptorem nostrum, sicut
verum Deum ex Patre, ut dictum est, ita et verum hominem ex
matre animam habere rationabilem et carnem cum sensibus suis
credit et confitetur.Qui homo, non tamen d^ôs
licet Deus sit et
Christos neque duas personas neque duos filios Dei in eum

credere oportet, sed ttnwn Christum unumque Dei Filium in
2
duabus, ut dictum est, naturis; singularis vero persona Sicut enim .
quilibet homo, ex anima ?-atio?iabili et came mortali subsistens, non

duo sed unus est homo, ita et Christus, et Deus et homo in unitatem
personae, non duo sed unus est Christus unus salvator mundi ac
;
redemptor humani generis aeqiialis : Patri in forma Dei, minor

vero ei in forma servi, creator matris suae et dominus secundum
potentiam Divinitatis, creatus vero ex ipsa films iuxta Jmmani-
tatem 3 Nam simul ex ea Deus et homo absque ulla corruptione
.
gemina autem persona, non conversione Divi-

substantia, simplici
nitatis in came neque humanitatis
in Divinitate id est, neque :
Divinitas, que immutabilis est, in humanitatem conversa est,

4
neque humanitas in Divinitatem Tenent igitur in eo in singu- .
1
In the MS. a blank space has been left here. The sense seems to require
rationabilem.
2 '
The passage seems almost borrowed from St. Augustine non duo Christi
sunt, nee duo filii Dei, sed una persona, unus Christus Dei filius idemque unus
Christus.' S. Aug. Ser. ccxciv. 9.
3
Two
remarks suggest themselves here. First, that the Commentator, while
clearly following the verse of the Creed commencing aeqiialis Patri, has
substituted for secundum Dimnitatcm and secundum humanitatem, which we
have in the Creed, expressions borrowed from St. Paul, Philip, ii. 6, 7 in
forma Dei and in forma servi. And then the very remarkable antithesis, intro-
duced here as a comment, is clearly derived from the same source as the verse
itself the writings of St. Augustine. We find,
'
Erat ante carnem suam. Ipse
crcavit matrem suam. Elegit, in
qua conciperelur; creavit, de qua crcaretur?
'
S. Aug. Ser. cxix. 6 ; apud Migne, Patrol. Lat. Also Proinde quod acl
Verbum adtinet, Creator est Christus ;
omnia enim per ipsum facia simt. Quod
vero ad hominem, creatus est Christus. Facltis enim ex semine David secundum
carnem? Ibid, de Praesentia Dei, liber seu Epist. clxxxvii. 8. Again, ' Filius
hominis nee sic assumptus ut prius creatus post assumeretur, sed ut ipsa as-
. . .
sumptionc crcaretur? Ibid. Contra sermonem Arianorum liber units, cap. viii.
4
The MS. certainly has humanitatem here it is written humanitate with :
the mark of contraction over the e, which, indicates of course the omission of
Appendix. 485
laritate personae utrque naturae absque ulla convertibilitate
proprietates suas, Dei scilicet quod Dei est et hominis quod

homo est. Sicut enim in essentiam Divinitatis unum sunt 1
cum
Patre, ipso dicente :
Ego et Pater unum sumus ",
ita in natura
humanitatis unum est cum Ecclesia; quiaidem Christus Dominus

cum Ecclesia Catholica, quae est sponsa eius et caput et corpus,
unus est Christus, Apostolo hoc affirmante atque dicente Propter :
hoc relinquet homo patrem et matrem et adherebit uxori suae, et

erunt duo in came una. Sacramentum hoc magnum est ; ego autem
dico in Christo et in Ecclesia*. Hoc autem ideo Dominus fieri
voluit, ne in Trinitate, quod absit,

quaternitas ;
intromittatur
quemadmodum Nestorius hereticus impie predicare ausus est,
qui dixit beatam Mariam virginem non Deum et hominern

4
genuisse in quo homine postea propter meritum sanctitatis
,
Divinitatem Filii Dei habitasse, sicut et in ceteris sanctis. Ac

5
per hoc, non unam, sed duas in Christo asserunt esse personas,
et introduxit in Trinitatem quaternitatem cuius impia professio :
G
procul absit a cordibus fidelium Nos autem credere oportet .
saepedictum Dei Filium secundum Divinitatem invisibiliter in

utero virginis Mariae introisse, et veram carnem ex substantia
eiusdem virginis Mariae, quam cum Patre et Spiritu Sancto
7
creavit, quasi quoddam vestimentum in singularitate personae
the final ni. This leads us to suppose that the Commentator read carnem in the
quotation from the Creed, but that he or the copyist omitted inadvertently the
mark of contraction over the e, thus changing the word into came. This
comment may be compared with the following passage of St. Cyril's third
Epistle to Nestorius, as translated by Dionysius Exiguus Nee carnem clicimus :

'
in naturam Deitatis esse conversam, nee in substantiam carnis ineffabilem Dei

Verbi essentiam commutatam.' Routh, Scriptoruvi Eccksiasticorum Opuscula,
torn. ii.
p. 38. See also S. Aug. de Trin. i. 14.
1 ' 2
So the MS., clearly for est.' S. Joh. x. 30.
3
Ephes. v. 31, 32.
4
'sed hominem' no doubt should have been written. 'Nestorius beatam
Mariam virginem non Dei, sed hominis tantummodo credidit genitricem.'
S. Leo, ad Leonetu Augustina.
5
So the MS. probably a clerical error for asscruit.
;
Fortunatus' Commentary has

'
ne propter adsnmptionem humanae carnis
dicatur esse quaternitas, quod absit a fidelium cordibus vel sensibus dici aut
cogitari.'
7
Quid enim vestimentum
'
So St. Gregory in Ezekiel, lib. ii. Horn, i-
9 :
eius,
'
nisi corpus quod assumsit ex virgine ?
486 Appendix.
suae ita tinisse, ut nee Deus sine homine nee homo absque Deo
utraque natura et una persona
3
fieri omnino potuisset ;
et ita in
incorruptibiliter ex ea natum. Et idcirco iam dictani virginem

Mariam non hominis tantum, sed Dei et hominis, genitricem
credimus et confitemur ; quia Dei Filius, non personam hominis,
sed naturam ex ea assumpsit humanitatis quia nequaquam con-
2
ceptio carnis in virginis utero Divinitatis praevenit adventu ,
sed praevenit virginis conceptum ; quam humanam

Divinitas
naturam tota Trinitas in utero virginis creavit, sed solus Filius
in singularitate persong suae suscepit atque univit. Idcirco
autem Dei naturam humani generis, id est, perfectum
Filius
hominem absque peccato de virgine suscipere dignatus est, ut per
eandem naturam, quae in paradise a diabolo decepta montem
incurrerat; rursum eundem diabolum, non potentia Divinitatis,
sed ratione iustitiae vinceret et prostraret, et per indebitam
mortem suam debitam mortem nostram evacuaret, et credentibus
sibi perpetuam vitam condonaret ; quatinus et diabolus per
iustitiam victus cederet, et, quos iniuste retinebat, amitteret, et
humanum genus, non merito suo, seu libero arbitrio, sed sola
gratia misericordiae salvaretur. Et ideo ob redemptionem humani
generis, ut dictum est, Divinitatis suae potentia passus esf, in
carne mortutts, et sepultus est in eadem carne. Secundum
animam descendit ad infernum. Secundum virtutem Divinitatis
suae die iertia in eadem carne, in qua mortuus fuerat, vivus
resurrexit. Post resurrectionem vero suam per dies xl multis
modis discipulis suis se vivum exhibuit, atque ad palpandum
prebuit, ad confirmandam eorum fidem, et hereticorum de-
et
struendam perfidiam, qui eum negant veram carnem in caelo

3
levasse ,
cibum petiit, et coram eis comedit :
quadragesimo vero
die post resurrectionem suam, videntibus apostolis suis, ascendit
'
1 '
omnino is written in small letters above the line.
2
Thus the MS. The mark of abbreviation over the zi has probably been
omitted through inadvertence.
3
The Apellitae taught that Christ left His body dissolved in the air, and so
ascended into heaven without it '
Hunc Apellem dicunt quidam etiam de
:
Christo tam falsa sensisse, ut diceret eum non qui clem carnem deposuisse de
caelo, sed ex elementis mundi accepisse, quam mundo reddidit, cum sine carne
resurgens in caelum ascendit.' S. Aug. de ffaeresibus, xxiii. See Pearson on

the Creed, note on the Article '
He ascended into Heaven.'
Appendix. 487
in caehim, et sedetad dexteram Patris, id est, regnat in glorialn

et beatitudinem sempiternam. Quern inde ventunim ad faciendum
indicium vivorum et mortuorum in ipso mundi termino sustinemus
in eadem forma humanitatis et vera carne, in qua ascendit, sed
glorificata, non infirma aut despecta, sicut in primo adventu, cum
venit occultus, ut iudicaretur, sed, ut dictum est, in gloriam
1
Patris et suam, non ut iudicetur, sed iudicet et reddet unicuique
secundum opus suum. De cuius adventu secundo in libro
apocalypsin scriptum est : Ecce veniet cum nubihis caeli, et videbit
2
enm omnis qui ilium pupttgerunt / ipse quoque in
oculus^ et
evangelic de suo adventu ait Cum venerit filius hominis in :
maiestate sua, et omnes angeli cum eo 3 / et iterum ipse : Verum-

5
tamen putas inveniet fidem in terra ? In
filius hominis veniet^,
cuius adventu ad angelicam tubam omnes defuncti a primo
homine Adam usque ad ultimum, qui in fine mundi obiturus erit,
tarn pii, quam impii, tarn iusti, quam etiam iniusti secundum
apostolicam auctoritatem in ictu oculi in eadem carne, in qua
vixerunt, qua bona
et in
vel mala gesserunt, et in qua mortui
sunt, resurgere habent, non naturam aut sexum mutantes, id est,
neque vir in sexum femineum, neque mulier in virili forma, sed
unusquisque, ut dictum est, in propria forma atque sexu, in qua
vixit et mortuus fuit, resurrecturus erit, ut in eadem carne, in qua
bona vel mala gesserunt, recipiat unusquisque quod meretur 6 .
2 3
1
So the MS. Apoc. i.
7. S. Matt. xxv. 31.
*
Clearly an error for 'veniens,' the scribe probably being misled by
'
in-
'
veniet immediately after. In the MS. the corrector has inserted ns after veniet.'
'
5
S. Luc. xviii. 8.
6
The
doctrine here maintained respecting the continuance in the future life
of the distinction of the sexes had been clearly asserted by St. Jerome '
Ego :
libere dicam et . . . fidem Ecclesiae apertissime confitebor. Resurrectionis

veritas sine carne et ossibus, sine sanguine et membris, intelligi non potest.
Ubi caro et ossa et sanguis et membra sunt, ibi necesse est ut sexus diversus sit.
Ubi sexus diversus est, ibi loannes, loannes, Maria, Maria. Noli timere
eorum nuptias, qui etiam ante mortem in sexu suo sine sexns opere vixerunt.'
'
Again :
Angelorum nobis similitude promittitur, id est, beatitude ilia, in qua
sine carne et sexu sunt Angeli, nobis in carne et sexu nostro donabitur.'
S. Hieronymi liber con. loannem Hicrosolymitanum, cap. xxxi Migne, Patrol. ;
Lat. torn, xxiii. p. 383. Of

the eight errors of Origen against which this book
of St. Jerome's was directed, the fifth was quod carnis resurrectionem mem-
'
brorumque compagem et sexum, quo viri dividimur a feminis, apertissime neget.'
He maintained that the Origenist tenet was inconsistent with the terms of the
488 Appendix.
1
Illud tamen nobis credendum est, quod tarn iusti, quam et
peccatores incorrupta recipiant corpora sua. Hoc est, quod ultra

mori non poterunt, apostolo hoc affirmante atque dicente Ornnes :
quidem non omnes inmutabimur, in momenta, in ictu

resztrgemus, sed
oculi, in novissima tuba. Canet enim tuba, et mortui resurgent
incorrupti, et nos inmutamur'i . Ideo tarn electi, quam reprobi,
incorrupta recipient corpora, quatinus et iusti in eadem carne, in
qua propter Deum in hac vita poenas seu ceteros labores sus-
tinuerunt, in ipsa recipiant a Domino aeternam beatitudinem et
perpetuam gloriam. In quibus erit aeterna vita una remuneratio,
sed pro diversitate meritorum dissimilis gloria. Similiter et omnes
reprobi, impii videlicet et peccatores, in propria corpora sua, in
3
quae prave seu luxuriose vixerunt, recepturi sunt aeternam
dampnationem, quibus tamen pro qualitate vel quantitate
in
peccatorum dissimilis erit poena, sed una dampnatio sempiterna.
Hoc quippe indicium Deus Pater omnipotens per Filium suum

in hominem assumptum facturus est, sicut ipse Filius in evangelic
de semet ipso testatur dicens : Pater non iudicat quemquam, sed
omne indicium dedit Filio
4
. Non tamen ita accipiendum est, ut
Filius absque Patre et Spiritu Sancto, a quibus omnino dividi
non potest, solus iudicet ;
sed ideo ita dictum credimus, quia
Pater invisibilis est, et a nullo hominum videri potest. Et ideo
solus Filius, quia ipse solus formam
ut dictum est, iudicabit,
servi accepit, in qua visibiliter vivos et mortuos iudicaturus est.
Invisibiliter vero tota Trinitas iudicabit visibiliter autem, ut :
'
Creed carnis resurrectionem,' heretics admitting a resurrection of the body
'
but not of the flesh. In symbolo fidei et spei nostrae, quod ab Apostolis
traditum, non scribitur in charta et atramento, sed in tabulis cordis carnalibus ;
post confessionem Trinitatis et unitatem Ecclesiae omne Christiani dogmatis
sacramentum carnis resurrectione concltiditur.' Ibid. cap. xxviii. The statement
of the Athanasian Creed '
omnes homines resurgere habent cum corporibus
'
suis is clearly not a mere general enunciation of the doctrine of the Resur-
rection ; it is a distinct assertion of the identity of the risen body in each
individual. In this respect it is very valuable, but the force of the original is
lost in 'with their bodies,' instead of 'with their own bodies.'
our translation
1
The
corrector appears to have inserted the letter with the mark of m
'
abbreviation after ' et with the intention of altering it into ' etiam.'
2
i Cor. xv. 51, 52. The corrector has made a mark over the a in '
inmuta-
mur,' evidently because he thought it an error for 'inmutabimur.'
z
So the MS. ,
4
S.Joh. Evan. v. 22.
Appendix. 489
dictum est, solus Filius in forma servi iuste iudicabit, qui ob

redemptionem humani generis solus in carne assumpta iniuste ab
impiis iudicatus est. In cuius iudicio electi duabus in partibus
discreti erunt, id est, perfectis, quibus dictum est : Sedebitis super
duodecim sedes iudicantes XII tribus Israel 1
Quod enim apostolis
.
tune promissum est, ad omnes perfectos pertinet, qui cum Domino

ceteros iudicabunt. Secundus vero ordo erit in illis, qui ad
2
superiorem, hoc est, apostolorum et martyrum se perfectorum
mensuram pervenire non potuerunt, et tamen per satisfactionem
per elemosynarum largitionem, per compassionem
poenitentie,
sanctorum, et cetera iustitiae opera vitam consecuturi sunt
aeternam. Talibus enim convenit ilia Domini sententia, qua
ait Facite vobis amicos de iniqito mamona,
:
zit, cum defeceritis,
s
recipiant vos in eterna tabernacula ; et illud : Qui vos recipit, me
recipit^. Reprobi vero similiter duabus distincti erunt in partibus,
impiis videlicet et peccatoribus. Impii appellantur omnes in-
fideles, qui Dominum non noverunt,, de quibus psalmista ait:
Non resurgunt impio in iiidicio
5
Resurgent utique, non ut
.
6
iudicentur, sed ut punientur ; quoniam secundum apostolicam
1
auctoritatem quicunque sine lege peccaverunt, sine lege et peribunf .
De talibus veritas in evangelic ait :

Qui non credit, tarn iudicatus
8
est ;
hoc est, iam dampnatus est. Peccatores vero vocantur,
qui intra Ecclesiam per fidem commorantur, sed prave vivunt.
De talibus rursum psalmista ait Neque peccatores in consilio :
iustomm* ; de quibus et Paulus: Confitetur^ se nosse Deum,

factis autem negant, cum sint abbominati, et incredibiles, et ad onme
11
opus bonum reprobi quos et Dominus per evangelium increpat
;
dicens :
Quid prodest qui dicitis michi, Domine, Domine, et non
1
S. Matt. xix. 28.
2
So the MS. ; but a small has been inserted by the corrector over
'
se.'
3
S. Luc. xvi. 9.
4
S. Matt. x. 40. There is nothing in this passage inconsistent with the
hypothesis that the Commentary was the work of the seventh cenlury. It
follows SS. Augustine and Ambrose in its interpretation of our Lord's words.
See especially S. Aug. de Civ. Dei, lib. xxi. 28, 5. Also St. Ambrose on
St. Luke xvi. 9, and the Catena A^trca of Thomas Aquinas on St. Luke, cap. xvi.
5
So the MS. The Vulgate has non resurgent impii in hulicio, Ps. i.
8
S.Joh. Evan. iii. 18.
7
6
So the MS. Rom. ii. 12.
)0
So the MS.
n Tit. i. 16.
Ps. i. ;.
49 Appendix.
facitisquae dico*. Sicut enim fides, quam se mali Christian!

habere gloriantur, absque bonis operibus eos salvare non potest,
ita bonum opus quodcunque infideles agunt, sine fide nichil illis
prodest, apostolo hoc affirmante, qui ait :

Omne, quad non est ex
fide, peccatum est*. Et ideo solos illos credimus posse salvos
fieri, qui et fidem rectam absque ullo discrimine retinent, et
bonis operibus, in quantum possunt, laborare non desinunt,
vitantes scilicet atque mortifera
capitalia crimina, sicut ait
psalmista : Declina a malo et fac bonum*; et alibi: Quiescife
1
S. Luc. vi. 46.
2
The last is from Rom. xiv. 23.
quotation This classification of 'impii'
'
and peccatores is found in Bruno's Exposition of the Psalms, in a passage
'
borrowed from Cassiodorus '

Impii sunt, qui sanctam Trinitatem nullatenus
:
confitentur. Resurgitnt impii, sed non in indicia, quia iam iudicati sunt.
lustusstirgit, ut iudicet ; peccator, ut iudicetur ; impius ut sine iudicio puniatur.
Peccatores sunt Christiani, sed peccatis obnoxii, qui ideo non resurgunt in
consilio iustorum, id est, in iudicio iustorum, quia iam illis, scilicet iustis, per
gratiam confessionis peccata dimissa sunt.' Brunonis Expos. Psalm, i. 6;
Migne, Patrol. Lot. torn, cxlii. p. 51. It appears also in Bede :

'
Et congrega-
buntnr ante eum omnes gentes et reliqua. Duo sunt itaque ordines hominum
in iudicio collectorum, qui tamen in Perfectorum ordines
qualuor dividuntur.
duo sunt :
unus, qui cum Domino iudicabit, et non indicantur, de qui bus
Dominus ait: Sedcbitis et vos stipe f sedes duodecim; alius, qui bus dicetur :
Esurivi, et dedistis mihi manducare

Matt. xxv. 35), hi iudicabuntur et
(S.
regnabunt. Item reproborum ordines duo sunt unus eorum, qui extra Eccle- :
siam inveniendi sunt, hi non iudicabuntur et peribunt, de quibus Psalmista ait :
Non resurgunt impii in iudicio.

Aliter quoque reproborum est eorum, qui
iudicabuntur et peribunt, quibus dicitur : Esurivi, et non dedistis milii mandu-
care (S. Matt. xxv. 42).' Bedae Expositio in Matthaei evangelium, cap. xxv ;
Migne, Patrol. Lat. torn. xcii. p. 109. It will be observed that this passage, like
the Commentary, divides the elect, as well as the reprobate, into two classes ;
and it was Bede's declared principle to follow the interpretations of the Fathers.
St. Ambrose gives a similar description of 'peccatores' and 'impii': 'Ergo
impii non resurgunt in iudicio, hoc est, in portionem eorum, qui indicium
subituri sunt, nee peccatores resurgunt in consilio iustorum. Vicles, quia
surgunt impii, et non surgent in iudicio iustorum, quia peccatores, ,etsi non
resurgent in consilio iustorum, resurgent tamen in iudicio. Unde videntur, qui
bene crediderunt, fidem suam etiam operibus executi sunt, ipsi non iudicari,
et
sed surgere in consilio iustorum. Peccatores autem, qui non possunt inter
iustos surgere. surgent in iudicio. Habes duos ordines. Tertins superest im-
piorum, qui quoniam non crediderunt, iam iudicati sunt, et ideo non resurgent
in iudicio, sed ad paenam.' S. Ambros. Enarratio in Psalmum I.
3
Ps. xxxiii. 14. Declina, it is worth noticing, is the reading of the Vetus
version of the Psalter ; the Roman and Gallican have Diverte.
Appendix, 491
1
agere perverse, discite bene facere .
Quod autem dicimus de
Christo Domino: Inde ventums vivos ac martnas*, vivos in-
tellegimus, quos dies iudicii vivos invenerit, mortuos autem

omnes, qui antea obierunt, et tune resurrecturi erunt ;
vel certe,
ut quidam volunt, sicut per viventes electi, ita per mortuos
s
reprobi omnes accipiendi sunt . Post futurum vero iudicium, et
iustorum remunerationem, atque iniquorum dampnationem, quic-
quid in utrisque divina sententia decreverit, id est, in electis ac
reprobis, aetermim et sine fine erit : nee mali ultra gaudia
sperabunt, nee boni Quoniam, sicut
tristitiam formidabunt.
electi perpetua letitia fruentes ad reproborum dampnationem, ut
quidam heretici voluerunt, in aeternum reversuri non erunt; ita

*
et reprobi in perpetua demersi ad electorum gaudia nequaquam
ultra consurgent, ipso iudice teste, qui ait : Et ibttnt /it, id est,
impii et peccatores, in supplicium aeternum, iusti autem in vitam

aeternam 5 Haec est fides cathollca, quam universalis Ecclesia in
.
electis suiscorde credit, ore profitetur, et bonis operibus exequitur.

De qua quicunque ex his, qui Cbristiano nomine censentur,
fide
quicquam detraxerit aut credere noluerit, proculdubio catholicus

non erit, sed intra Ecclesiam positus sub nomine Christianitatis
recte catholicus, ut hereticus, deputabitur.
1
The words of Isaiah (i. 16, 17) seem to be here attributed to the Psalmist,
but possibly it may be a mere clerical error ; the copyist may have omitted
'
alibi the words scriptum est.'
' '
after
2
So the MS. originally, but the corrector has written indicate' above
'vivos.' Obviously it had been omitted inadvertently by the original hand.
3 ' '
These two alternative interpretations of vivi and mortui are also given ' '
by Fortunatus' Commentary. The correspondence seems to indicate that the

writer still bad the earlier exposition before him in the latter portion of his
Commentary, relating to the Incarnation, although he ceases to follow it

closely, as in the former part concerning the Trinity. similar indication A
may be found in the allusion to Nestorianism as inconsistent with the doctrine
of the Trinity, and introducing a quaternity of Persons.
4
A
word must be here omitted, probably ' tristitia.'
5
S. Matt. xxv. 46.
492 Appendix.
G.
Copy of the second Commentary on the Athanasian Creed,

contained in Troyes 804, and immediately following the
'
foregoing one. It is preceded by the title Item alia

expositio.' The collations of tJie copy of this Commentary,
edited by Mai froml
a manuscript in the Vatican, are
added in the notes. The title which he applies to it,
'
Symboli Athanasiani explanatiol is not to be found in

the MS.
Qiiicunque milt .satvus csse, ante omnia opus est, ut teneat
catholicam fidem, quam nisi quisque integrant inviolatamque serva-
verit, absque dubio in aeternum peribit. Quod dicitur in capita

horum versuum, hoc repetitur in fine. Nam hoc est in aeternum
perire, quod salvum non esse et hoc est salvum esse, quod non
;
perire. Sed quid est quod integram et inviolatam servandam

admonet- fidem, nisi quia nichil de ilia est auferendum, nichil
mutandtim, sicut in fine libri apocalipsis terribiliter contestatum
est. Demunt namque et violant, id est, minuunt et corrumpunt
2
sacramenta fidei heretici et scismatici ;
et idcirco eicit illos
3
foras ecclesiam et excludit a se, ut ipsa sine macula inveniatur
*
et ruga. Sicut enim Deus veritas est, ita ea, que. apostolica
ecclesiade Deo docuit, vera sunt. Si aliquid horum depinxeris 5
aut mutaris, intrat putredo de veneno serpentis, nascitur vermis
mendaciorum, et nichil integrum remanebit, quia ubi fuerit
B
corruptio falsitatis, non ibi erit integritatis veritatis .
Oportunum
1 2 '
Scriptornni veterum nova collect jo, torn. ix. p. 396. For eiicit.'
3
In the corresponding passage of the Bouhier Commentary, Troyes 1979
and 1532 and B. M. Addit. 24902 have '
ecclesia.'
4
Mai reads '
veracitas.'
5 '
Mai, depresseris.' Troyes 1979 in the corresponding passage h,as 'de-
'
traxeris.' Probably the right reading is dempseris.'
Mai reads integritas.' This sentence, from Si aliquid' to 'veritatis,' is
' '
found almost word for word in Prosper's Liber sententiarum ex Augnstino,

piintecl in the Appendix to St. Augustine's works No. 326 of the series. See
Migne, Patrol. Laf. xiv. iSSS. The Commentator evidently drew directly
from Prosper, who flourished in the early half of the fifth century. The
original source, from which the latter borrowed the greater portion of the
passage, was St. Augustine's Tract, in Joh. Evan. viii. 5. Some of these
Appendix. 493
1
namque michi videtur paucis
admonendum, quam ilia sit fides
2
qug salvat que. in aeternum perire non sinit nempe non est :
ilia, qua demones credunt et contremescunt, non tamen diligunt
aut sperant quod credunt, sed ilia potius est, que, per dilectionem
3
operatur, ilia videlicet dilectione ,
de qua Dominus ait: Qui
diligit me, sermones meos seruat*. Quam dilectionem quisquis
adeptus fuerit, sentit proculdubio quantum et quale bonum sit
Deus. Quod etiam ex hoc ostenditur, quia nulli ab eo recedenti
bene est
5
. A quo enim habet homo ut sit, ab eo habet ut bene
6
sit . Et hoc est bonum hominis ut summi et incommutabilis
7
boni adhaereat naturae ; quod si noluerit, bono se privat, cuius
participatione esse ipse poterat. Bonum sit, malum est ei

s
propter quod etiam per iustitiam Dei cruciatus consequitur.

Quid enim tarn iniquum quam ut bene sit ei, qui voluntarie
deserit summum bonum ? Sed hoc malum, quod fit deserendum
summum bonum. Idcirco autem 10 plerique non sentiunt, quia
inferius amant temporale bonum ; sed divina iustitia est, ut, qui
voluntate deserit Deum, cum dolore amittat quod amat preter
eum ", et ab hoc dolore fides non liberet eum. Fides namque
sentences of Prosper were incorporated in the Canons of the Second Council of
Orange, A. D. 529.
I 2
Mai reads '
qiiae.' Mai omits quj '
salvat.'
3 '
So the MS. The mark of contraction over the final letters of
'
ilia and
'
'
dilectione has probably been omitted through inadvertence. Mai reads
'
dilectio.'
*
Compare S. Luc. xiv. 23, 24.
5 ' '
From quantum '
to
'
bene est seems to be drawn directly from Prosper's
Sententiae, cclxxxix ; qitale bomtin sit Deus 'indirectly from St. Augustine,
de Genesi ad Literam, lib. xi. cap. v.

Apparently fj om St.s., lib. xi. cap. viii: 'Qui gloriatur, non-
Augustine, u.
nisi in Domino gloriatur, cum cognoscit non suum, sed illius esse, non solum
ut sit, verum etiam ut nonnisi ab illo bene sibi sit, a quo habet nt sit.'
7
Mai reads summae et incommutabiliter
'
bonae.'
8
The passage is evidently corrupt. Mai reads '
poterat bonus, et magnum

malum est ei bonum non
Prosper and St. Augustine, in the passagesesse.'
which the Commentator here borrows from, both have Quod si noluerit, bor.o '
se privat, et hoc ei malum est.'

8 10
Mai, 'deserendo,' Mai omits autem.' '
The whole of this passage, beginning with 'hoc est bonum hominis' and
II
ending here, is clearly drawn from Prosper's Senteniiae, cclxxxvii, DC bono

humanae naturae and it is equally clear ;
that Prosper drew from St. Augustine,
ad Litteram, lib. viii. cap. xiv.
de Genesi
494 Appendix.
alionomine dicitur credulitas ; nam apud Grecos fides et credu-

litasuno dicitur nomine. Catholica grecum nomen est; inter-
pretatur autem latino eloquio universalis, quia toto mundo diffusa
1
ecclesia est ,
et toto tempore hanc tenet fidem et tenuit, neque
unquam aut tempore mutata est aut locis variata. Nam hereti-
corum fides non potest did catolica, quia non est publica, sed
privata; nee ubique tenetur, nee semper fuisse monstratur.
Sequitur Fides autem catholica haec est, lit unum Deum in
:
trinitate et trinitatem in unitate veneremur. Unitas in Deitate,

1
trinitas est in personis. Veneremur ergo Unitatem Deitatis in
trinitate personarum, veneremur trinitatem personarum in Unitate
Deitatis. In qua trinitatem 2 substantiae unitas, ut aequalitatem
teneat, pluralitatem non recipiat 3 tantum 4 personarum distinctio, ,
ut unione non permisceatur B Tres personae unius sunt essentie., .
sive nature, unius virtutis, unius operationis, unius beatitudinis,
atque unius potestatis, ut trina sit unitas, et una sit trinitas. Ita
ut unusquisque eorum verus perfectusque sit Deus, videlicet ex
G
plenitudine Uivinitatis nichil minus in singulis, nichil amplius ut
7
intellegatur in tribus . Nee hums trinitatis tertia pars est unus,
8
nee maior pars duo quam unus . Ita tota Deitas sui perfectione
aequalis est, ut exceptis vocabulis, qu proprietatem indicant per-

sonarum, quicquid de una persona dixeris, de tribus dignissime
9
possit intellegi ; et non maius sit in tribus quam in singulis, nee
minus in singulis quam in tribus
10
. Vel u si in tribus hominibus
dicas quod sint immortales, ego non intellego plus posse vivere
simul tres quam singulos, nee minus singulos quam totos tres,
2
1
Mai omits '
est.' Mai reads '
trinitate tanta est.'
' '
3
From '
In Trinitate to
'
recipiat is drawn from Prosper's Sententiae ex
Augustino, ccxxvii.
I
So the MS., but in the corresponding passage in Troyes 1979 we have
'
tanta.'
5 '
Mai, permisceantur.' Mai omits ut.' '
'
7 '
This passage, from tres personae to in tribus,' appears in the Epistle of
'
Pelagius I to King Childebert. See Migne, torn. cv. p. 141.

' '
8
From nee to unus is from St. Augustine, Con. Maximimim, lib. ii.
' '
cap. x. 2.
'
a
From '
tota Deitas
'
to '
intellegi appears in the Creed of St. Jerome

so called.
lu '
From non '
to '
tribus
'
is in substance from St. Augustine, Ep. clxx. 5.
II
Mai reads '
velut.'
Appendix. 495
quoniam trium una est immortalitas. Aut si aequaliter sint

sapientes, non plus sapiunt simul quam singuli ;
sed tanta est in
l
unoquoque sapientia, quanta in tribus . Si haec ergo in creatura
invenitur ubi non est una anima aut unum cor, nisi
2
, per
3
dilectionem et fidem, quanto magis in creatore, in Patre scilicet

4
et Filio et Spiritu Sancto, cui est aeterna et incommutabilis
unitas, qui est indifferens trinitas, unus Deus 5 ,

unum lumen,
G
unumque principium .
Sequitur. Neque confundentes personas,
neque substantiam separantes. Sicut enim confutantes Arrium
unam eandemque dicimus trinitatis'esse substantiam, et unum in
tribus personis fatemur Deum, ita impietatem Sabellii declinantes
7 8
tres personas sub proprietatem distinguimus. Sabellius, qui
intellexit unam esse trinitatis substantiam, ideo confundens
9
personas, ipsum sibi Patrem, ipsum sibi Filium, ipsum Spiritum
Sanctum, esse dicebat. Nos tarn en non nomina tantum, sed
etiam nominum proprietates idem 10 confitemur. Nee Pater Filii
aut Spiritus Sancti personam aliquando excludit n ; nee rursus

Filius aut Spiritus Sanctus Patris nomen personamque recipit :
sed Pater semper Pater, Filius semper Filius, Spiritus Sanctus

semper Spiritus Sanctus. Arrius vero, quia cognovit tres personas,
idcirco et tres asseruit divinas substantias. Sed nos confitemur,
quia Pater et Filius et Spiritus Sanctus substantia unum sunt,
12
personis ac nominibus distinguntur Sequitur Alia est enim . :
persona Patris, alia Filii, alia Spiritus Sancti : sed Patris et

1
These illustrations are from St. Augustine, Ep. clxxxvii. cap. iv.
2 '
3
Mai reads '
inveniuntur. Mai adds 'forte.'
4 5
Mai reads 'qui.' Mai omits 'Dens.'
' '
6
From '
indifferens to
'
principium from Prosper's Liber Sententiarum
is
ex A^lgust^no > cccl, ex August ini Tract. 39 in Johannem, n. 5. It is in

substance from St. Augustine.
7 8
Mai 'proprietate.' Mai '
quia.'
'
9 '
sibi added by Mai.
is
10
o has been written above m in 'idem' by the corrector, and a line drawn
under it. Mai '
gives the right reading, no doubt, proprietates id est personas,'
which is found also in the Bouhier Commentary. This is one of the errors
which show that the scribe copied from an earlier codex. Probably the text
from which he copied omitted 'personas' and read 'id e'; and owing to the
'
omission of personas '
he misunderstood the contraction.
31
Mai reads
excludit aliquando.' '
12 '
Nearly the whole of this passage, from Arrium

' '
confutantes to dis-
tinguntur,' appears in the Fides Hieronymi.

496 Appendix.
Filii et Spiritus Sancti una est divinitas, aequalis gloria, et co-

aeterna maiestas. Aequalis gloria, quia non est maior in gloria
Pater, quam Filius aut Spiritus Sanctus. Non minorem * gloria
Spiritus Sancti quam Patris aut Filii. Coaeterna maiestas : quia
non est anterior Pater Filio aut Spiritu Sancto, non est posterior
Spiritus Sanctus Patre aut Filio. Sciendum tamen est, quia
personas dicere necessitas fecit disputationis contra hereticos :
nam in scripturis divinis dictum non invenitur. Doctores tamen

licenter hoc assumpserunt ;
non quia scriptura dicit, sed quia
scriptura non contradicit 2
. Nam cum dixeris, tres sunt, et mox
3
interrogatus fueris, qui sunt tres, nichil omnino respondendum
restat, nisi person?. Nam aliud quid respondeas, nichil habebis ;
quia non potest dicere, tres dii, aut tres substantig, aut aliquid
huiusmodi, quod absit. Dicta autem persona, quasi per se una,
4
eo quod per se sit. Dicitur etiam substantia eo quod per se ,
subsistat, nam quod nos dicimus personas, Greci dicunt ipotasis

r
',
quod interpretatur in Latino subsistentias : et quod apud nos

G
dicitur substantia, apud illos dicitur USIA . Et quidem in
Latina lingua quasi unum videtur esse substantia et subsistentia.
In Alexandrine tamen concilio, ubi hoc primum tractatum fuit,
ita definitum est, ut substantia ipsam rei naturam
alicuius
rationemque, qua constat, designet, subsistentia autem unius-
cuiusque person? hoc ipsum, quod extat et subsistit, ostendat.

Alia est enim persona Patris, alia Filii) alia Spiritus Sancti; quia
alius est inpersona Pater, alius in persona Filius, alius in persona
Spiritus Sanctus ;
non est alius in Deitate, non est alius in gloria.
Alius est Pater, et alius Filius, quia non est ipse Pater, qui
Filius ;
non est tamen aliud Pater et aliud Filius, quia hoc est
7
Pater, qui Filius. Adtendendum quoque diligenter, quod
1
The final m has been underscored by the corrector. Mai reads minor '
est.'
The cause of the error was evidently the same here as in the last instance. The
text from which the scribe copied probably had 'minor e.' He understood
the mark of contraction to signify the omission of the final m ;
but e ' '
is a very
common form of abbreviation for est.' '
2
This must have been founded upon St. Augustine, de Trin. lib. vii.
'
cap. iv. Propterea licuit loquendi et disputandi necessitate tres personas

8,
1
dicere, non quia Scriptura dicit, sed quia Scriptura non contradicit.
3
Mai 'quid.' 4
Mai '
subsistentia.' 5
Mai vTroracreis.
7
Mai ovma. Mai rightly 'quod.'
Appendix. 497
l
dicitur : non
est ipse Pater, qui Filius, sed ipsum est Pater, qui
Films 2 Pater enim genitor est, non genitus ; Filius genitus est,
.
non genitor ; Spiritus Sanctus non est genitor, quia non est Pater,
non est genitus, quia non est Filius, sed procedens est, quia
Spiritus. Hoc est tamen Filius, quod Pater, quia Deus, quia
creator, quia omnipotens, et cetera nomina, quae substantialia
sunt, non personalia, totius trinitatis aequalia sunt. Sciendum
quoque summopere est, quod Pater et Filius et Spiritus Sanctus
inseparabiles sunt etiam in personis, quia sicut ubique est Pater,
ita ubique Filius et Spiritus Sanctus; neque alium locum occupat
Pater, alium Filius, alium Spiritus Sanctus. Non enim mundum
inter se in tres partes diviserunt, quas singulas singuli implerent,
3 4
quasi non haberent, ubi essent Filius aut Spiritus Sanctus in
mundo, si totum occupasset Pater. Non ita se habet vera,
incorporea, inmutabilisque Divinitas. Non enim corpora sunt,

6
quorum amplius sit in tribus, quam in singulis, magnitude.
Nee loca suis molibus tenent, ut distantibus spatiis simul esse
non possint. Si enim anima in corpore constituta, non solum
nullas angustias sentit, verum etiam quandam latitudinem invenit
non corporalium 6 locorum sed spiritalium gaudiorum, cum sit
7
quod ait nescitis, quoniam corpora vestra templum in
Apostolus :
vobis SpiritiisSandi sunt, quern habetis in Deum 8 ? nee dici nisi 9

stultissime potest non habere locum in nostro corpore Spiritum
Sanctum, eo quod totum nostra anima impleverit quanto :
10
stultius dicitur ullis angustiis alicubi
imperari trinitatem, ut
u
Pater et Filius et Spiritus Sanctus ubique simul esse non possint .
Inseparabile est etiam opus trinitatis ; quia que.libet persona,
1
A dot has been made under the letter i and od written above it by the
corrector.
2
The reference may be to S. Aug. in lohan. Evan. Tract, xxxvi. 9.
3 ' '
In St. Augustine, haberet ubi esset is the reading.
*
Mai '
reads et.'
5
Mai reads '
amplior.' So also it is in St. Augustine.
6 7
Mai, 'incorporalium.' i Cor. vi. 19.
8 {
Mai reads, as do the Vulgate and St. Augustine, a Deo.'
9
Mai reads 'dicimus si.'
10
Mai reads 'impediri.' So also St. Augustine.
11
The whole of this passage, from 'Non enim mundum inter se' to
'
esse non
possint,' is from St. Augustine, de praesentia Dei, Epist. clxxxvii. cap. iv. 15.
K k
498 Appendix.
sicut sine aliis personis esse non potest, ita sine aliis non operatur,
1
et nichil seorsum agit inseparabilis caritas .
Sequitur: Quails
Pater, talis Filius, talis Spiritus Sanctus. Sciendum est omnino,
quod de Deo proprie non dicitur. Nam de illis decem
qualitas
2
speciebus categoriarum haec sunt, quibus caret Deus, id est,
qualitatem, quantitatem, situm, habitum, locum, tempus, et
3 4
passionem ;
non tamen caret substantiam aut relationem quia ,
et Pater et Filius et Spiritus Sanctus relativa sunt nomina unius

5
substantie.. Itaque absque illis speciebus intelligamus Deum,
quantum possumus, sine qualitate bonum, sine quantitate magnum,
sine indigentia creatorem, sine situ presentem, sine habitu omnia
continentem, sine loco ubique totum, sine tempore sempiternum,

sine ulla sui mutatione mutabilia facientem, nichilque patientem G .
Unam autem de his speciebus id est actionem, ideo pretermisi,

quia actio creatoris longe dissimilis est ab actu creature.. Nam
creatura sine motu et labore nichil potest agere, actio vero
creatoris sine motu et labore sola fit ei voluntate. Hoc tamen
quod dicitur :
qualis Pater, talis Filius, talis Spiritus Sanctus,
7
propter necessitatem contra hereticos usurpatum est, quia similem
Deo Patri Filium asserebant, dissirnilemque Spiritum Sanctum.
Nos tamen dinoscamus, quid sit in creatura substantig qualitas,
quid in creatore sine qualitate substantia. Proinde si de Deo

8
dicamus, aeternus, immortalis, incorruptibilis, immutabilis, unius ,
sapiens, et speciosus, iustus, bonus, beatus, spiritus. Horum

omnium quod novissimum posui, id est spiritus, quasi tantum
1
This is in substance from St. Augustine, in Johan. Tract, v. I and xx. 3.
2
Mai <
hae.'
3
Mai '
qualitate, quantitate, situ, habitn, loco, tempore, et passione.' It is
to be presumed that he found these readings in his MS., as he says nothing to
the contrary. But the Troyes MS. probably is right, the accusative case being
frequently used for the ablative in the age which produced this Commentary.
I have drawn attention to the occurrence of this barbarism in the previous
Commentary.
* 5
Mai reads '
substantia aut relatione.' Mai inserts 'nos.'
'
6
From '
intelligamus Deum to
'
patientem
'
is in St. Augustine, de Trin.
lib. v. cap. i.
7
Mai '
dissimilem.'
8
A dot
has been placed under the i by the corrector, signifying that ' unus
'
' '
is no doubt the
ought to have been written vivus ;
right reading. This
appears in Mai, and in St. Augustine in the passage here borrowed from.
Appendix. 499
modo videtur significare substantiam, cetera vero qualitates sub-

stantig eius. Sed non ita est in ilia ineffabili simplicique natura ;
1
quicquid enim secundum qualitatem illam dici videtur, secundum
substantiam vel essentiam est intellegendum. Absit enim ut
spiritus secundum substantiam dicatur Deus, et bonus secundum
2 3
qualitatem, sed utrumque substantiam ,
sicut secundum sub-
stantiam sapientia dicitur Deus. Sequitur : Increatus Pater,
increatus Films, increatus^ Spiritus Sanctus. Nichil in trinitate
creatum, quia tota trinitas unus est creator. Omnis
itaque sub-
5
stantia, qu Deus non est, creatura est ;
et qug creatura est, non .
Nulla igitur differentia est in Deitate trinitatis ; quoniam, quod

7
de c
Deo minus est, Deus non est .
Sequitur : Inmensus Pater,
inmensus Filius, inmensus 8 Spiritus Sanctus. Inmensus est Deus
trinitatis , quia nulla ratione, nulla estimatione metiri valet.
Mundo non capitur ; sic replet mundum, ut ipsum 10

contineat
mundum, non ut 11 contineatur a mundo. Est enim mundo
superior, inferior, exterior, et interior :
regendo superior, portando
inferior, circumdando exterior, replendo interior. Sic est per
cuncta diffusus, ut non sit qualitas mundi, sed substantia creatrix
mundi, sine labore regens
12
,
sine honore
13
continens, mundum.
'
1
Mai reads illic ; and so it is in St. Augustine.
'
2 '
'
secundnm has been written above by the corrector ;
it appears in Mai's
text, as also in St. Augustine.
3 '
From '
Proinde si
'
to '
secundum substantiam is from St. Augustine, de
Trin. xv. v. 8.
1
Mai inserts
'
et.'
s '
So the original text ;
but '
e,' that is
'
est,' has been inserted after non,'
'
and '
ds e
written in the margin. Mai reads '
creatura non est, Deus est.'
The Bouhier Commentary has the same.

6
Mai omits 'de.'
7 ' '
This passage, from Omnis itaque substantia to '
Deus non est,' is word
for word the same as Prosper's Liber sententiarum ex Augustino, Iv. The
Benedictine editors have given a marginal reference, '
Ex lib. 14 de civ. Dei et
est canon ii. concilii Arausicani.' I have not been able to verify the reference
'
to St. Augustine. Part of the passage from ' omnis to ' Deus est ' appears
in Alcuin, def.de S. Trinitatis, lib. ii. cap. ix, by whom, as well as by Prosper,
it must have been originally borrowed from St. Augustine, de Trin. lib. i.
cap. vi. 9. The author of the Commentary drew doubtless directly from
Prosper.
8 9
Mai inserts
'
et.' Mai reads '
trinitas.'
10 Il
Mai,
'
ipse.' Mai omits '
ut.'
12 13
Mai reads '
regnans.' Mai, as also St. Augustine,
'
onere.'
Kk 2,
500 Appendix.
Non tamen per spatia locorum, quasi mole diffusus, non ut in
dimidia mundi parte sit dimidius, et in alia dimidia dimidius,
l
atque ita per totum totus non sic dein solo cglo totus, et in :
2
sola terra totus, et in parte totus, et per cuncta totus : ita
3
contentus loco, sed in se ipso ubique totus Ita Pater, ita .
4
Filius, ita Spiritus Sanctus unus Deus trinitas ; sed et ineffabili
:
modo, cum sit ubique totus per Divinitatis presentiam, non est
Et, cum quosdam peccantes

5
ubique per habitationis gratiam .
8
deserit, eisdem tamen ipsis adest per iudicium, quibus decernimus
per adiumentum. Unde non dicimus, Pater noster qui es ubique,

cum procul dubio verum sit, sed Pater noster qui es in caelis, in
sanctis videlicet angelis et sanctis hominibus 7, in quibus
8
esse
dicitur non solum per presentiam su inmensitatis, verum etiam
per gratiam suae inhabitationis. Et propterea, cum supra dicerem

ubique esse Deum, addendum putavi in se ipso. Est namque
ubique, quia nusquam est absens, in se ipso autem, quia non
continetur quibus presens est,
eis, tanquam sine his esse non
possit. Nam
locorum tolle corporibus, nusquam erunt
spatia ;
et, quia nusquam erunt, nee erunt. Iterum tolle ipsa corpora
qualitatibus corporum, non erit ubi sint, et ideo necesse est ut
non sint
fl
: Deus autem, qui corporali loco non continetur, in se
'
11
ipse est ubique, scilicet per cuncta diffusus : sicut aqua ,
sicut
'
Mai reads '
sed in.' So also St. Angustine.
3
Mai reads '
et nullo.' So also St. Augustine.
3 ' '
From Sic '
est per cuncta to
'
ubique totus is from St. Augustine, de
praesentia Dei, Epist. clxxxvii. cap. iv. 14.
4 '
For et Mai reads ' miro.'
'
5
This is also almost word for word from St. Augustine, Epist. clxxxvii.
cap. v. 1 6,
' '
Quibus decernimus have been underscored by the corrector, and a mar-

ginal note has been added, which is partly lost owing to the leaf having been
cut away at the edge. Mai reads '
quibus deesse cernitur.'
7
This interpretation of the language of the Lord's Prayer must be drawn
from the same passage of St. Augustine. It also appears in another passage "of
that Father de Sermons Domini in Monte, ii. 17 a passage which has been
incorporated by Aleuin, but without acknowledgement, in his work de fide

S. Trinitatis, lib. ii.
cap. v.
8
Mai adds '
hominibus.'
9
This also, from 'Et propterea,' is almost word for word from St. Angustine,
" 10
Epist. clxxxvii. cap. vi. Mai reads 'ipso.'
11
Something has clearly been omitted before 'sicut aqua.' In the margin
Appendix. 501
aer, sicut etiam ipsa lux, qug in minori loco minora sunt, in
maiori maiora l Deus autem, cuius inmensitas atque magnitude
.
non est molis sed virtutis, sic est etiam in quolibet uno homine,
2
sicut per cuncta rerum machina " totus. Sequitur Aeternus :
Pater, aeternus Films, aeternus et Spiritus Sanctus. In Deitate

trinitatis quod est esse perpetuum est ", quia natura, initio carens,
increniento non indigens, sicut non incipitur, ita nee fine

terminatur. quippe est, ubi nee expectatur quod veniat,
Ibi
neque percurrit quod debeat recordari ; sed unum est quod

r>
semper esse est. Quod si nos et angeli cum initio videre in-
cipimus Deum, esse tamen hunc sine initio videmus. Ubi sic
6
semper sine fine esse est, ut nunquam se animus tendat ad
7
sequentia qua nulla pars suae longitudinis preterit, ut pars
,
in
alia succedat, in qua omne quod est animus videt, et tardum non
esse et longum esse. Et haec quidem 8 novimus qualiter tamen ;
9
sit ipsa aeternitas sine preterite ante saecula, sine futuro post
10
saeculum, sine mora longio sine prestolatione perpetua, adhuc ,
non videmus. Sequitur Et tamen, non tres aeterni, sed unus :
aeternus ; sicut non tres increati, nee tres inmensi, sed unus
increatus, et unus inmensus. Ideo non sunt tres aeterni, sed

11
unus; quia sicut unus natus naturae est Pater et Filius et
12
Spiritus Sanctus, sicut una est eorum increatio et inmensitas
atque aeternitas. Sequitur : Similiter omnipotens Pater, omni-

potent Filius, omnipotens et Spiritus Sanctus ; et tamen non tres
'
the corrector has written sed non ita cliffttsus.' That these are the omitted
words shown by the fact of their being found in Mai. Obviously the cause
is
of the error was the repetition of the word diffusus.' The corrector must have- '
had another copy of this Commentary before him.

I
In this sentence the commentator clearly follows St. Augustine, Epist.
cxxxvii. 4,
a 3
Mai reads 'cunctam.' Mai 'machinam.'
4
This is from St. Leo, Ep. lix. ad Constantinopolitanos.
5
Mai reads c
est unum.'
B
Mai reads 'semet,' but he has added a marginal note, 'Cod. set.'
' ' '
Apparently he supposed set to be a contraction for semet.'
7
Possibly the mark of contraction for the final m has been omitted over the
'
last letter in sequentia.'
9
8
Mai inserts 'per fidem.' Mai reads 'haec ipsa.'
10
re has been added by the corrector to 'longio,' but Mai reads longa.' '
I2
II
Mai '
sicut unius naturae.' Mai rightly sic.' '
502 Appendix.
1
ymnipotentes, sed unus omnipotent. Omnipotens dicitur , quia
omnia potest, sicut scriptum est :
Apud Deum autem omnia
z
omnia qu sunt, ut sint, potestate illius
possibilia sunt , vel quia
3
tenentur, nee Solent autem plerique aut quasi adu-
occidant.
lando Deo superflua de omnipotentia eius loqui, aut non necessaria
vera docere, cum cimicum aut muscarum vel culicum multitudinem
ad curam Dei pertinere aiunt et notitiam ; et propter illud, quod
unum de duobus aut quinque passeribus non
in evangelic dicitur,
Deo 5 autfenum agri & uri 7 audent predicare,

cadere in terra* sine , ,
quod non solum genera, sed et numerum vermium noverit Deus,

8
quod ex corruptione corporum aut viventium aut mortuorum
9
lignorumque aut aquarum corruptionibus vivificantur. Ni qui
10
dicunt, quia omnia potest, quippe qui sibi mortem concedere
nequit nee mutari possit a bono. Sed, qui ista dicere vel audire
attentissime Deum simplicis esse nature.,
11
delectantur, intellegunt
12 ls
ita ut non sint in Deo aliud esse et aliud habere, nee esse eius
aliud velle et aliud posse, sed hoc est velle quod posse. Omnia
14
ergo quae vult potest, et quod potest vult ; nee maior est
voluntas, eius, sed neque minor ; sed utraque
quam potentia,
tanta est, quia Deus hoc est, quod habet. Aeterni-
quanta et ille,
tatem quippe habet, sed ipsa 15 est aeternitas sua ; lucem habet,
sed lux sua ipse est. Nam in creatura nulla vere simplex sub-
stantia est, cui hoc esse quod nosse. Potest enim esse
non est
nee nosse. At
non potest, quia id ipsum est quod
ilia divina
habet. Ac per hoc non sic habet scientiam, ut aliud 16 illi sit
scientia qua scit, aliud essentia qua est sed utrumque unum, ;
quamvis non utrumque dicendum sit, quod verissime simplex et
unum est ". Sequitur Ita Deus Pater, Deus Filius, Deus et :
2
1
Mai '
elicit.' St. Matt. xix. 26. 3
Mai <
ne.'
* 5 6
Mai 'terrain.' St. Matt. x. 29. St. Matt. vi. 28.
7 '
For '
uri Mai reads Mai quotquot.'
'
vestire.'
8 '
'
9 '
Aliqui is Mai's reading.

frequently he'snpplies the It is observable how
right reading. I have before remarked on the numerous errors of the Troves MS.,
as proofs that the scribe was copying from an older document.
10
Mai adds '
non.' u Mai '
intellegant.'
12 ls
Mai sit.' '
Mai '
est.'
14
After 'vult' Mai inserts 'quoniam sic potens est, ut dispositionem suam
servet, et nullo modo sua statuta convellat.'
13 '
1B
Mai '
ipse.' Mai '
alia.'
'
17
This passage, from '
in creatura nulla to
'
et unum est,' is almost word for
Appendix. 503
Spiritus Sanctus. Dominus Pater, Domimis Filius, Dominus

et Spiritus Sanctus. Et tamen non tresDii aut tres Domini, sed
unus Deus et units Dominus. De imitate Deitatis et dominatione
sanctae trinitatis iam sufficienter dictum est ;
sed tamen sciendum
est, quod Deus dicatur ad se, Dominus ad
creaturas, quibus
dominatur Deus, quia solus colendus est ', Dominus, quia solus
;
timendus ; Deus religiosorum, Dominus vero servorum. Sequitur :
Quia sicut singillatim unamquamque personam Deum ac Dominum

confiteri Christiana veritate compellimur, ita tres Deos aut tres
Dominos dicere catholica prohibemur. Singillatim, hoc
religione
est, viritim vel singulariter, quia singulus Pater Deus et Dominus
est, singulus Filius Deus et Dominus est, singulus Spiritus Sanctus

Deus et Dominus est. Ita nos dicere fides Christiana cogit;
quia, nisi ita dixerimus, Christiani esse non possumus, et tamen

alium Deum aut Dominum dicere Patrem, alium Deum aut
Dominum dicere Filium, alium Deum aut Dominum dicere
Spiritum Sanctum prohibet nos catholica religio. Quia, si ita

dixerimus, nee catholici nee religiosi esse poterimus. Sed ut
Christiani simus atque catholici, dicamus vel potius credamus et
Patrem Deum et Filium Deum et Spiritum Sanctum Deum, et
simul, non tres Deos, sed unum Deum, qui substantia et natura
sit veraciter unus. Sequitur : Pater a mtllo est factus, nee creatus,
nee genitus : Filius a Patre solo est, non factus, aut creatus, sed
genitus :
Spiritus Sanctus a Patre et Filio, non factus, attt creatus,
nee genitus, sed procedens. Quod factus aut creatus nee Pater sit,
nee Filius, nee Spiritus Sanctus, iam supra dictum est. Sed et
de Patre, quod non genitus, quia non est Filius, sed genitor
sit
tantum, quia Pater est, iam premissum est. Nunc vero atten-
dendum omnino, quod dicitur, Filius a Patre solo est genitus,
Spiritus .autem Sanctus ab utroque, id est, a Patre Filioque
procedens, spiritus amborum est, Patris scilicet et Filii : Filius
autem solius est Patris. Et haec est causa, quae distinguit quid
word from St. Augustine, Tract, in lohan. xcix. 4. But it seems to have been
taken directly from Prosperi liber Sententiarum ex Augustino, ccclxviii, where
' '
it appears exactly as it is found in the text. This liber sententiarum is
printed, as Ihave before mentioned, in the Appendix to St. Augustine's works,
Benedictine edition, and in Migne, Patrol. Lat. torn. xlv.
1
Mai omits ' est.'
504 Appendix.
differat inter nativitatem Filii et processionem Spiritus Sancti.
Filius de Patre, quomodo natus, non quomodo datus;
sic est
Spiritus vero Sanctus sic est de Patre, simul et Filio, quomodo

datus, non quomodo natus, hoc est, donum amborum
]
Itaque .
Filius nascendo procedit, Spiritus vero Sanctus procedendo non

nascitur, ne sint duo filii. Sequitur Unus ergo Pater, non tres :
Patres ; unus unus Spiritus Sanctus, sed 2

Filius, non tres Filii;
3
non tres
Spiritus Sancti. Hgc ilia relativa nomina, sed sunt
appellativa, in quibus trinitas invenitur. Non enim sic dicitur
unus Pater aut unus Filius, sicut dicitur unus inmensus aut unus
aeternus aut unus Deus, quia ilia nomina sunt substantiae, hoc
4 5
est, unitas Pater videlicet, Filius, Verbum, et Spiritus
;
ista ,
c
Sanctus, nomina sunt personarum, hoc est, trinitas Et ideo .
relativa sunt nomina, quia Pater ad alium refertur, hoc est, ad

Filium non enim sibi ipsi est Pater, sed alteri, hoc est, Filio
;
:
similiter Filius ad Patrem refertur sed 7 Spiritus Sanctus vel :
donum, cum dicitur, refertur ad Patrem et Filium, a quibus

procedit vel datur. Nam ilia nomina substantialia, hoc est,
Deus, Uominus, aeternus, et cetera, de quibus iatn satis scriptum
est, in quacunque persona dicantur, non referuntur ad aliam sed
ad seipsum 8 Nam etsi Apostolus dicit Christum Dei virtutem

.
et Dei sapientiam, tamen non ita est relativum in eo virtus et
sapientia, sicut est quod dicitur Verbum aut Filius. Virtus enim
et sapientia in Deo substantia est, Verbum autem aut imago aut
7
Filius relativum. Quod si Pater, qui genuit sapientiam ,
ex ea
9
fit sapiens, neque hoc est illi esse quod sapere ; qualitas eius
erit Filius, non proles
10
eius, et non ibi erit iam summa simplicitas;
'
1
The
expression
'
quomodo datus, non quomodo natus is really from
St. Augustine, de Trin. lib. v. cap. xv. The same Father carefully guards
'
against the term donum as applied to the Holy Spirit being understood in
'
a sense derogatory to His eternal Procession, de Trin. lib. v. cap. xvi. Alcnin,
defide S. Trinilatis , lib. ii. cap. xx, does the same, adopting the very language
of St. Augustine, but without acknowledgement.
2
Mai omits '
sed.'
3
This has been underscored, and 'vel' written above it by the corrector.
' '
Vel is the reading of Mai.
5
4
Mai reads unitatis.' '
Mai adds vero.' '
6 7
Mai reads trinitatis.'
'
Mai adds et.' '
9
B
Mai alium sed ad seipsam.'
'
-.
Mai omits est.' '
10
Mai reads 'prolis.'
Appendix. 505
1 2
sed non ita sit .
Ergo et Pater ipse sapientia est, et ita dicit
3
Filius a sapientia Patris, quomodo dicitur lumen Patris, id est,
ut quemadmodum lumen de lumine, et utrumque lumen unum,
4
sic intellegatur sapientia de sapientia, et utrumque una sapientia .
Pater igitur et Filius simul una essentia et una magnitudo et una

virtus
5
et una sapientia. Sed non Pater et Filius simul ambo
unum Verbum, quia non simul ambo unus Filius. Verbum enim
6
relative, sapientia essentialiter intelligitur .
Sapientia ergo Filius-
de sapientia Patre, sicut lumen de lumine, et Deus de Deo, ut et
singulus Pater lumen, et singulus Filius lumen, et singulus Pater
Deus, et singulus Filius Deus. Ergo et singulus Pater sapientia,
et singulus Filius sapientia. Sicut utrumque simul unum lumen
7 8
et unus Deus, sicut utrumque una sapientia Spiritus quoque .
Sanctus sapientia, et simul non tres sapienti 9 ; sed una sapientia

Pater et Filius et Spiritus Sanctus 10 Sequitur Sed in hac . :
trinitate nichil prius aut fosterius, nichil maius aut minus. Haec
et trinitas est Deus; et, quia unus est, non potest esse
unus
]1
diversus; quia natura non potest seipsa esse prior aut posterior,
maior aut minor. Non est Pater prior Filio neque maior non :
est Spiritus Sanctus posterior Patre aut Filio vel minor. Sequitur :
1
This is underscored, and in the margin is written absit ut ita sit,' which
'
is
the reading of Mai and of the passage in St. Augustine, de Trin. lib. vii. cap. i.
2, from which this sentence, beginning at

'
Quod si Pater,' is copied.
2
Mai dicitur
' '
so also St. Augustine.
;
y
Mai and the printed text of St. Augustine omit 'a.'
4
This sentence is also from St. Aug. de Trin. lib. vii. cap. i. 2. Alcuin
too, defide S. Trinitatis, lib. ii.
cap. 14, has borrowed the passage, but without
acknowledgement.
'
In St. Augustine, for
r> '
virtus we have '
veritas.'
6
From 'Pater igitur' to 'intelligitur' is from St. Aug. de Trin. lib. vii.
cap. ii.
7
In Mai, as also in St. Augustine, it is sic.' '
8
This also, from ' Sapientia ergo ' to una sapientia,' is word for word from '
St Aug. de Trin. lib. vii. cap. iii. 4. Mai and the Bouhier Commentary
both add sed Filius factus est nobis sapientia a Deo, de qua cum aliquid in
'
scripturis dicitur, Filins nobis insinuate.' This too is from St. Augustine :
' '
from '
sed to
'
Deo comes immediately after the last-mentioned passage ;
the
rest iscompiled from a sentence which follows very shortly after. The words
must have been omitted by the scribe of the Troyes MS. through inadvertence.
9
Mai '
sapientes.'
10
This is in substance from St. Aug. de Trin. lib, vii. cap. iii. 6.
11
Mai inserts 'una.'
506 Appendix.
Sed totae tres personae quo-aeternae sibi sunt et quo-aequales. Ita
ut per omma, sicut iam supra dictum est, et trinitas in unitate et
unitas in trinitate veneranda sit. Qui ergo vult salvus esse, ita de
Sequitur: Sed necessarium est ad aeternam
1
trinitate sentiat .
salutem ut incarnationem quoque Domini nostri Ihesu Christi

fideliter credat. Sicut fideliter credenda est divinitas regnantis,
ita fideliter credenda est humanitas salvantis, quia equalis patri-
2
cole est de mysterio incarnationis prave sentire, ut divinitatis
3
archana male intellegere. Nihil enim iustius quam ut salvus
non qui salutis mysterio derogare non timuerit.
sit, Sciendum
sane, quod aliam significationem habeat Ihesus, aliam Christus,
cum sit unus salvator. Ihesus tamen proprium nomen est illi,
sicut propria nomina sunt Elias aut Abraam Christus autem :
4
sacramenti nomen quomodo si dicatur propheta aut
est, patri-
5
archa . Ihesus quoque nomen ebream, interpretatur in latino
salutaris sive salvator : Christus autem grece dicitur, quod trans-
6
fertur in latinum unctus ab unctione, id est, chrisma et hebraice
7
dicitur messias Sequitur Est ergo fides recta, ^tt credamus et
. :
confiteamur quia Dominus noster Ihesus Christus Deus pariter et

homo est. Hoc enim est illud sacramentum ab initio ex vulva
dispositum, ut semen Abra mundi conditor apprehenderet,
quatinus in se ipso nostrae probaret primitias naturae, ut
Deus homo fieret in
8
singularitate personae copulans utramque
1
Mai adds Et haec iam dicta sunt.'
'
a
So apparently the MS. Mai and the Bonhier Commentary both have
'
which is doubtless the right reading. The expression must have
periculi,'
been borrowed from St. Leo, who in his Epistle to Flavian and also in his
fifty-first Sermon uses these words Aequalis periculi erat Dominum lesum
'
:
Christum aut Deum tantummodo sine homine aut sine Deo solum hominem
credidisse.' And the same Father says similarly in another Sermon, xxvii.
cap. i: 'Paris periculimalum est, si illi aut naturae nostrae veritas aut
paternae gloriae negatur aequalitas.' St. Leo appears to have followed
St. Hilary, de Trin. ix. 3 ' Eiusdem periculi res est Christum lesum vel
:
Spiritum Deum vel carnem nostri corporis denegare.'

3 *
Mai de '
divinitatis arcano.' Mai adds '
dicatur.'
5
From
'aliam significationem' to 'propheta' is clearly derived from St.
Augustine, Tractahis Hi. in Epistolam loannis, 6.
Mai '
chrismate.'
7
From 'Ihesus' to 'messias' bears an obvious resemblance to the corre-
sponding passage in the Troyes Commentary.
8 '
For '
in Mai reads '
ut.'
Appendix. 507
l
naturam, mediator Dei et hominum hominibus appareret et his, ,
2
propter quos venerat redimendos, ipse unus autem Deus et
3
legifer et rex et magister et redemptor Deus et redemptio,
sacerdos et oblatio, veritas et vita, sapientia et doctor, id est,
4
qualiter et se sequentibus exempla vivendi monstraret; et suo
generi, id est, hominibus homo ipse factus per gratiam consuleret,
quibus suffragari iustitia nullatenus volebat 5
; ut, cum ille in
homine mortem vinceret, natura in eo humani generis trium-
pharet. In illo enim nostra portio, quia nostra caro et sanguis,
ut, ubi regnat nostra portio, nos quoque glorificemur. Quamvis
G 7
igitur peccato ,
de hac communicatione gratiae non desperes 8 ;
quia, etsi peccata nos prohibent, substantia nos requirit ; si

9 10
delicta propria exquirunt natur communio non repellit
,
Aug. ad Vohisiamim, or Efist. cxxxvii. cap.

1
This evidently follows S. iii.
2 '
For autem Mai reads
' '
esset.'
3
Mai omits Deus.' '
4 5
Mai omits se.' '
Mai valebat.'
'
"
The corrector has written the letter r above the o in '
peccato.' Mai reads
'
peccator.'
7 8
Mai communione.'
'
Mai '
desperet.'
"
Mai '
excludunt.'
10 ' '
This passage, from In illo nostra portio to repellit,' has an obvious
'
resemblance to the following passage, which appears in the fifteenth chapter

of the Liber Meditationum, in the fifth Appendix to the works of St. Augustine :
'
Est enim in ipso lesu Christo Domino nostro uniuscuinsque nostrum portio,
caro et sanguis. Ubi ergo portio mea regnat, regnare credo.
ibi me
Ubi caro
mea glorificatur, ibi gloriosum me Ubi sanguis mea dominatur,
esse cognosco.
ibi dominari me sentio. Quamvis peccator sim, de hac communione gratiae
non diffido. mea prohibent, substantia mea requirit. Etsi delicta
Etsi peccata
mea me excludunt, naturae communio non repellit.' This Liber Meditationutii
is a collection of prayers and meditations drawn from earlier sources, and the
greater part of it, comprising the above passage, is identified with a book
compiled by Johannes Fiscamnensis, who died A. D. 1178, and compiled,

according to his own account, which appears in the dedication and preface,
from Scripture and the works of the Fathers. And so it is described in
a manuscript written about the time of the compiler. (See Admonitio to
Liber Mcditatiomim in the Benedictine edition of St. Augustine.) The Liber
Meditationum was attributed to St. Augustine, and hence was at first edited
among his works. That the author of the Oratorian Commentary should have
drawn from Johannes Fiscamnensis, the earlier from the later writer, is of
course impossible ; that the converse process did not take place would appear
from a comparison of the two passages ; it remains for there can be no other
way of accounting for the resemblance that both must have drawn inde-
pendently from the same source, and that source must have been the work of
some Father prior to either of them, of what Father is unknown.
508 Appendix.
Nullum enim maius donum prestare posset Deus hominibus,
quam ut Verbum suum, per quod condidit omnia, faceret illis
x
caput, et illos ei, tanquam membra, cohabitaret ,
ut esset films
Dei et filius hominis, unus 2
cum Patre, unus homo cum homini-
3
bus .
Sequitur : Deus est ex substantia Patris ante saecula
genitus, homo est ex substantia matris in saeculo natus :
perfectus
Deus, perfectus homo et^ ex anima rationali et humana carne sub-
sistens. Ingressus est igitur Filius Dei uterum Virginis, ut iterum
nasceretur, ante iam genitus, qui suscepit tantum B hominem, qui
iam habebat de Patre 6
plenissimam Deitatem, non dissimilis
Patri cum nascitur eorum 7 aeterno perpetuus, non dissimilis
homini cum ex matre nascitur moriturus consubstantialis Patri
8
;
secundum Divinitatem, consubstantialis matri secundum cognatam

9
nobis infirmitatem
quia natus est de Patre, et
: essentialiter
30
essentialiter conceptus natusque de matre, ut esset unus natur
cum Virgine ". Natus 12
idcirco perfectus Deus, quia non 13 dis-
I '
For '
Mai reads coaptaret.' This reading is found
cohabitaret '
in St.
Augustine. The Bouhier Commentary has coaptavit.' '
3
The Boiihier Commentary adds Deus.' So also St. Augustine. '
3 ' ' ' '

This from nullum to hominibus inclusive is from S. Aug. in Psalmum,
Ixxxv. T.
4
Mai omits et.' < r>
Mai '
totum.'
6
Mai 'quia iam de Patre habebat.'
7 '
So the MS. apparently, but for eorum Mai reads ' '
ex."
8 '
This passage, from Ingressus to moriturus/ is found in Vigilius, de
' '
Unitate Trinitatis, cap. xiv. Compare St. Augustine, in loh. Evan. Tract.
xii. 8 :
'
Duae nativitates Christi intelliguntur, una divina, altera humana, una
per quam efficeremur, altera per quam reficeremur, ambae mirabiles, ilia sine
matre, ista sine patre.'
9
The expression cognatam nobis infirmitatem appears in St. Augustine,
' '
Epist. ad Velusianum, cap. iii. Compare Vincentii Lirinensis, Commonitorium

primum, 13: 'In uno eodemque Christo duae substantiae sunt sed una ;
divina, altera humana una ex Patre Deo, altera ex matre yirgine una
; ;
coaeterna et aequalis Patri, altera ex tempore et minor Patre una consubstan- ;
tialis Patri, altera consubstantialis matri ; unus tamen idemque Christus in
utraque substantia.'
10
A small i has been written above the n in 'unus '
by the corrector. Mai

'
reads unius.'
II '
The words '
unius nature, cum Patre et have clearly been omitted in-
'
advertently after esset,' as appears by the Bouhier Commentary which inserts
them. The above passage bears an evident correspondence with the following
from the work entitled Liber de Fide ad Petrutk ' Verbum carnem factum :
;
ipsum quoque esse, qui essentialiter natus est de Patre et essentialiter con-
Appendix. 509
1
similis Deo Patri, perfedus homo, quia similis omni
2
matri, qug
mater ilium salva virginitate genuit, sic ut salva virginitate
ita
concoepit Verus enim Deus verus factus est homo, quia

!!
omnia nostra suscepit, qu in nobis ipse creavit, id est, carnem

et animam rationalem propter quod: confitemur perfectum 4
eum 5 Deum et perfectum hominem. Sequitur

6
Aequalis Patri :
secundum Divinitatem, minor 1 Patre secundum humanitatem.

Ideo aequalis et minor, quia Deus et homo, quia sempiternus et
temporalis, ut incomprehensibilis comprehend! posset, et immor-
talis haberet, in quo moreretur. Sequitur :
Qui licet Deus sit
et homo, non duo tamen, sed unus est Christus. Non est alter
Christus in Deitate, et alter in humanitate, quia non sunt duae

personae, sed una. Deus enim Verbum non accepit personam
hominis, sed naturam, et persona Divinitatis accepit substantiam
carnis, ut in singularitate personae tota humanitas suscepta unus
Christus unus films Dei atque hominis 8
sit, et Nam sicut tres .
personas sanctae trinitatis credimus in unitate naturae, ita credimus

duas Christi naturas in unitate personae. In uno etiam Christo,
ceptus est natusque de Virgine ipsumque unum esse et nnius naturae cum ;
Patre et unius naturae cum Virgine.' Liber de Fide ad Petrum, cap. xiii.
S. Aug. Opera. See Migne, Patrol. Lat. torn. xl. p. 753. This work was
formerly attributed toSt. Augustine, but by the Benedictine editors it has been
placed in the Appendix to his works, and is assigned by them without hesitation
to Fulgentius.
12 ' 13
For '
natus Mai reads '
et.' Mai adds '
est.'
1
Mai adds quoque.' '
2 ' '
The corrector has written no above omni ' '

in the belief obviously that
'
'
omnino was the right reading ;
but Mai has homini,' which is found also in
'
the Bouhier Commentary, and is no doubt the right one. The expression is
found Augustine, Sermo ccxv.
in St. 4.
3
This seems to be borrowed all but word for word from St. Leo :
'
Con-
ceptus est . . . intra uterum virginis matris quae ilium ila salva virginitate
edidit, quemadmodum salva virginitate concepit.' Epist. ad Flaviamcm, 2.
Mai omits the words genuit '

. . .
virginitate.'
*
Mai propterea.'
' a
Mai eum '
perfectum.'
6
Mai adds est.' '
7 '
After an erasure has taken place. Mai adds est.'
'
minor '
8
Here again we
are able to trace an evident correspondence of language
with Fulgentius' Liber de Fide ad Pet mm. The passage is in the seventeenth
chapter of that book Deus Verbum non accepit personam hominis, sed
:
'
naturam ; et in aeternam personam Divinitatis accepit temporalem substantiam

carnis.'
510 Appendix.
1
sicut duas credimus naturas, ita duas naturales operationes
indivise, inconvertibiliter, inseparabiliter, inconfuse ;
et has duas
voluntates, non contrarias, sed sequentem humanam eius volun-
tatem et non resistentem vel reluctantem, sed potius subiectam
2
divine, eius atque omnipotente voluntati. Sicut enim eius caro
Dei Verbum dicitur et est, ita et naturalis carnis eius voluntas
propria Dei Verbi dicitur et est. Quemadmodum enim sanc-
tissima atque inmaculata animata s eius caro deificata est, non est
4
perempta, sed in proprio sui statu et ratione permansit, ita et
humana eius voluntas deificata 5 est 6 Nam salvator, sicut .
humanam naturam propterea suscepit, ut salvaret, ideo et
humanam voluntatem vel operationem suscipiendo salvavit. Se-
quitur: Unus autem non conversione Divinitatis in carne"1 sed
assumptione humanitatis in Deo

8
Conversio mutatio dicitur. .
Non enim est conversa id est, mutata Divinitas in carne 7 ; sed

9
,
10
manens, quod Humanitas quoque as-
erat, suscepit carnem .
11
sumpta Deum, non consumpta
est in Sicut enim Deus non .
mutatur miseratione, ita homo non consumitur dignitate 12 Homo .
Deo accessit, Deus a se non recessit adquievit esse, quod non :
1
After 'naturales' the margin of the MS. supplies the words 'voluntates et
duas naturales.' They appear in Mai.
2
The corrector has drawn a line through the final e. Mai reads '
omni-
potent!.'
" *
Mai adds que.' '
Mai omits '
in.'
5
Mai reads Dei facta,' but
'
'deificata' is no doubt the right reading, being
'
found in the Interpretatio vetus.'
6
The whole of this passage respecting the divine and human wills of our
'
ita duas naturales voluntates down to voluntas
'
blessed Lord, from the words
'
deificata est,' isfrom an Interpretatio vetus Latina of the Definition of the

Sixth General Council. See Rputh's Scriptorum Ecclesiasticoriim Opusctila,
torn. ii. pp. 241, 242, Oxon. 1840. Routh says of this Veins Interpretatio:
'
In editionibus Conciliorum recentioribus adposita est Definition! ;
in vetus-
tioribus ante Graece edita concilia comparet.'
8
7
Mai '
carnem.' Mai Deum.'
' 9
Mai conversa
'
est.'
'
10
See Augustine, Enchiridion, cap. xxxiv
St. Verbum caro factum :
est,
a Divinitate carne suscepta, non in carnem Divinitate mutata.'
11
Compare St. Augustine :
'
Forma servi accessit, non forma Dei recessit :
haec est assumpta, non ilia consumta.' Trac. in lohannem, Ixxviii. I .
12
This sentence, Sicut enim dignitate,' is from Leo's Epistle to Flavian.
'
. . .
A previous instance of verbal correspondence with that document has been

noticed.
Appendix. 511
erat ;
non desiit esse, erat \ quod
Sequitur Unus omnino, non :
confusione substantiae, sed unitate personae. Confusio dicitur

permixtio : sicut solent duo liquores ita misceri, ut neutrum
'
2
servet integritatem suam . In Christo ergo non sunt permixtg
substantiae, quia servat utraque cum alterius communione pro-
prietatem suam in singularitate personae. Sequitur : Nam sicut
anima rationalis et caro unus est homo, ita Deus et homo imus est
Christus. Sicut in quolibet homine non est una persona anima 3

et alia caro, sed ex anima et carne unus est homo ita in Christo ;
non sunt duae personae, sed una divina, quae incarnata est.
Nam sicut hominis personam gestat anima, non enim corpus
mortuum dicitur persona sicut nee lapis aut lignum, ita Christi
personam gestat Divinitas, assumptrix humanitatis :
propter quod
in utraque substantia dicitur et creditur unicus et unigenitus
4
Filius Dei Unde et Verbum propter carnem homo est, et caro
.
propter Verbum Deus est 5 Sequitur Qui passus est pro salute
. :
nostra. Passus assumpta substantia.

est ;
Licet
et in sola
enim iuxta naturam suam expers passionis extiterit, pro nobis
tamen carne passus est; quia erat in crucifixo proprio corpore
impassibiliter ad se referens passiones. Gratia vero Dei pro
omnibus gustavit mortem tradens ei proprium corpus, quamvis
1
In St. Augustine, Epist. cxxxvii. 10, the very words
'
Homo non . . .
'
recessit' occur. Compare also ibid. Ser. cxxi. 5 Accessit ad nos, sed a se :
non multum recessit immo a se, quod Deus est, nunquam recessit sed addidit,
; ;
quod erat, naturae nostrae. Accessit enim ad id, quod non erat; non amisit,
quod erat. Factus est Filius hominis, non cessavit esse Filius Dei.' The
commentator must have had these passages before him.
2
This seems to be from St. Augustine, Epist. cxxxvii. cap. iii.
3 4
Mai 'animae.' Mai '
Deus.'
5
This is based apparently upon a passage of Vigilius Tapsensis, con.
Eutychetem, 5 Verbum propter carnem suam homo lesus Christus
lib. iv. :
'
'
et Verbum Dens Verbum est
caro propter and shortly after, Christus ;
'
. . .
idem Deus, idem homo unde constat et divinitatem humanitatis et humani-

:
tatem divinitatis habere vocabulum id est, Verbum dici carnem, et carnem ;
dici Verbum non quia in se utrumque mutatum sit, sed quia utrumque una
;
persona, id est unus Christus sit.' Vigilius flourished towards the close of the
fifth century. Alcuin, who is much in the habit of adopting the language of
earlier writers, appears also to have had this passage before him.
'
Caro Deus
est,' he says, 'propter Verbum, et Verbum homo propter carnem.' Adv.
Felicem, i. 10. The commentator clearly followed Vigilius, not Alcuin.
6
Mai reads 'pro salute nostra passus est, sed.'
512 Appendix.
*
naturaliter ipse vita sit et resurrectio mortuorum ". Sequitur :
Descendit ad inferno, ;
ut mortem s ineffabili potentia proculcata
expoliaret infernum. Tertia die resurrexit a mortuis ; ut primo-
genitus ex mortuis fieret primitiae dormientium, et faceret viam

humanae naturae ad incorruptionis recursum 4 Sequitur Ascendit . :
ad coelos, sedet ad dexteram Patris. Propterea humiliatus est

Deus in homine, ut homo exaltaretur in Deo, et unus Christus,
5
qui inclinatur in assumptis, assumpta glorificaret in propriis,
dum non dedignatur iniuriis et ad aequalitatem recurrit
affici
Genitoris 7 Sedet ad dexteram Patris, id est, regnat in beati-

.
tudine superna. Sedere enim regnare est; dextera vero Patris

beatitudo est sempiterna. Sequitur Inde venturus iudicare vivos :
et mortuos, Inde, hocest, dextera Patris venturus est, quia

visionem humanitatis omnibus presentaturus, ut in iudicio sit
conspicuus in ea forma, qua iudicatus est. Querendum est
autem, quomodo intellegatur quod ipse Dominus ait in evangelic :
Ego non iudicabo, sed verbum, quod locutus sum vobis, iiidicabit
vos
8
/ cum in alio loco dixerit : Pater non iudicat quemquam sed
10
omne indicium dedit Filio 9 Ita enim intellegendum est Ego . :
non iudicabo ex potestate humana, sed iudicabo ex potestate

Verbi n Quapropter Filius hominis iudicaturus est, nee tamen
.
ex humana potestate, sed ex ea, qua Filius Dei est. Et rursus

12
Filius Dei iudicaturus est, nee tamen in ea forma apparens, in
1 5
Mai '
ipsa.
'
2 '
This, from Licet to mortuorum,' is from the translation of the Synodical
'
Epistle of St. Cyril of Alexandria by Dionysius Exiguus. Routh, Opuscula,

torn. ii.
p 40, Oxford, 1840.
3
Mai '
morte.'
*
These two notes are also from St. Cyril's Epistle.
5
Mai 'glorificasset.'
6
Mai inserts
'
et.'
' ' '
\
This passage, from unus to Genitoris,' is apparently founded on the
following passage in Vigilius Tapsensis, de Unitate Trinitatis, cap. xvi :
'
Unus autem atque inseparables Christus et humiliatur in assnmptis et glorifi-
catur in propriis, cum affici non dedignatur iniuriis et aequalitatem custodit
Genitoris.' See Migne, Patrol. Lat. torn. Ixii. p. 345.
8
In this free quotation from St. John xii. 47, 48, the commentator clearly
follows St. Augustine, de Trin, i. 27.
9 10
St.John v. 22. Mai omits 'enim.'
11
This is literally the interpretation of St. Augustine in the passage just
referred to de Trin. i. 27. There cannot /be the least doubt from what
13
source the commentator drew here. Mai omits 'Dei.'
Appendix. 513
qua Deus
1
est, sed in ea, qua Filius hominis est . Ita quoque
dicitur : Pater non iudicat quemquam, ac si diceret 2 Patrem :
nemo videbit in iudicio, sed omnes Filium, quia Filius hominis
est, ut sit in iudicio conspicuus bonis et malis 3

. Nam invisibiliter
tota Trinitas iudicabit. Vivos et mortuos, id est, eos quos dies
eos qui iam antea obierant.
iudicii vivos invenerit et Sequitur.
Ad cuius adventum omnes homines resurgere habent ciim corporibus
suis, et reddituri sunt de factis propriis rationem. Adveniente
Domino resuscitantur mortui cum corporibus suis, ut unusquis-
que eo corpore, quod * bona vel mala gessit, reddat rationem

in
gestorum suorum, et in eo corpore, per quod operatus est, recipiat

retributionem factorum suorum. Sequitur. Et qiii bona egerunt,
ibunt in vitam aeternam. Tune enim humana 5 ad conditoris sui
similitudinem sublimabitur, et omnia ei bona, quae naturaliter
accepta per peccata corruperat, reparabuntur in melius, id est,
intellectus sine errore, memoria sine oblivione, cogitatio sine
pervagatione, caritas sine simulatione, sensus sine offensione,

incolumitas sine debilitate, salus sine dolore, vita sine morte,
facultas sine impedimento, saturitas sine fastidio, et tota sanitas
sine morbo. Sequitur. Qui vero mala egerunt, in ignem aeternum.
Multi egerunt mala, qui non ibunt in ignem aeternum, quia ante
mortem suam veram penitudinem de peccatis suis gesserunt ; sed
8
haec 7 de illis dicitur, quia mala egerunt et in malis perse-
veraverunt et non emendaverunt. Aeternus vero est ignis, qui
eis aeternus exhibet cruciatus, quia nunquam finietur, nee eos
desinet cruciare 10
Haec est fides nisi
u
.
Sequitur. catholica, quam
fideliter firmiterque crediderit, salvus esse non poterit, Fideliter
credamus, ut in fide non erremus ;

firmiter credamus, ut de
1
From Quapropter' to hominis est is from St. Aug. de Trin. i.
' ' '
28.
2
Mai reads diceretur.' '
'
J
Here too the Commentator is evidently following St. Augustine, de Trin.
i.
29.
*
Mai reads 'quo.'
'
5
Some word is evidently omitted.
'
Substantia is written in the margin.
It is found in Mai.
7
Mai adds et.' '
Mai '
hoc.'
8
Mai reads dicitur de illis, qui.'
'
9
So the MS., but Mai reads quia '
aeternos.'
10 ll
Mai cruciari.'
'
Mai adds '
quique.'
Ll
514 Appendix.
creditis non dubitemus, si volumus ad aeternam salutem pervenire,

ubi cum angelis Deum laudantes de illius laude vivamus, de illius
laude et nos gloriemur, qui vivit et regnat per infinita semper

saecula saeculorum l .
H.
Preface to the Oratorian Commentary, edited by Cardinal
Mai, ^Scriptorum vetemm nova collectio,' torn, ix. p. 396,

from the Vatican MS. 231, Reg. f. 152 v, with the
original readings of the MS. where the editor has
departed from the text.
Iniunxistis mihi illud fidei opusculum, quod passim in ecclesiis

2
recitatur quodque a presbyteris nostris usitatius quam cetera
opuscula meditatur, sanctorum patrum sententiis quasi exponendo
dilatarem, consulentes parrochiae nostrae presbyteris, qui suffi-
cienter habere libros nullo modo possunt, sed vix et cum labore
3
sibi psalterium, lectionarium, vel missalem adquirunt, per quos
divina sacramenta vel officia agere queant; et quia cum inopia
librorum plerisque neque studium legendi aut discendi suffra-
5
getur '',
idcirco vultis ut saltim hanc fidei expositionem meditari
cogantur, ut aliquanto amplius de Deo possint sapere et intel-
legere. Quia maxima omnium ista pernicies est, quod sacerdote.s

qui plebes Dei docere debuerant, ipsi Deum ignorare inveniuntur:
c
nam, sicut laico blasphemia, ita sacerdoti voluntaria Dei igno-
ratio in sacrilegium deputatur. Hoc namque opusculum non
T
quidem est altis sermonibus obscurum nee laciniosis sententiis
arduum, cum paene

8
plebeio conscriptum sit sermone ;
sed
9
tamen si adiunguntur ei pro locis necessariis tractatorum fidei
10
verba, plurimum iuvat ad fidei notitiam. Traditur enim quod
a beatissimo Athanasio Alexandrinae ecclesiae antestite sit
editum : ita namque semper eum vidi praetitulatum etiam in

veteribus codicibus et puto quod
;
idcirco tarn piano et brevi
2
1
Mai adds 'Amen.' MS. '
quoq.'
3
MS. 'pereos.'
5
4
MS. snffragatur.'
'
MS. '
meditarc.' G
MS. '
isla.'
7 8 9
MS. latiniosis.'
'
MS. 'pene.* MS. 'tractorum.'
10
MS. plurimumbat.'
'
Appendix. 515
sermone traditum fuerit, ut omnibus catholicis etiam minus

eruditistutamentum defensionis prestaret adversus illani tempes-
tatem, quam ventus contrarius, hoc est diabolus, excitavit per
l
Arrium. Qua tempestate navicula, hoc est Christi ecclesia, in
"
medio mari videlicet mundo, diu tantis fluctibus est 3 vexata, sed
non soluta aut submersa. Quia ille imperavit vento et mari, qui
se eidem ecclesie promisit usque ad finem saeculi affuturum.
4
Quicunque ergo ex huius maris fluctibus salvari desiderat et
in profundum abyssi, aeternam videlicet perditionem, demergi
pavescit, teneat integre et inviolabiliter fidei veritatem. Ita

5
enim incipit ipsum opusculum :
Quicunque milt, etc.
I.
THE BOUHIER COMMENTARY.

The text is tJiat of Troyes 1979. Collations are given from
Troyes 1532, and Additional 24,903,
British Museum
described respectively as Tr. 1532 and B. M. Addit.
24,902.
Incipit expositio Sancti Augustini Fidei Sancti Athanasii

Episcopi in veneratione Sanctissime Trinitatis individuaeque
G
Unitatis omnipotentissimi universitatis Dei .
Traditur quod a beatissimo Athanasio Alexandriae 7 ecclesie

antistite istud fidei opusculum sit editum, sic 8 etiam in veteribus
codicibus invenitur pretitulatum. Quod idcirco tarn brevi et

9
piano sermone tune traditum fuisse cognoscitur, ut omnibus
10
catholicis etiam minus eruditis tutamentum defensionis prestaret
adversus illam tempestatem, quam ventus contrarius, hoc est,
diabolus excitavit per Arrium. Qua tempestate navicula, hoc
1 2 3 *
MS. 'id.' MS. 'tanta.' MS. 'et.' MS. <
de.'
5
MS. '
incipitur.'
6
In Tr. 1532 the title is 'Incipit expositio fidei catholice Sancti Athanasii
'
Episcopi ; in B. M. Addit. 24,902 Incipit expositio fidei catholicae.'

'
7 8 '
B. M. Addit. 24,902 ' Alexandrine/ B. M. Addit, 24,902 sicut.'
9
B.M. Addit. 24,902 ' piano et brevi.'
10
Tr. 1532 omits 'defensionis.'
L 1 2
516 Appendix.
est
1
,
medio mari, videlicet 2 mundo, diu iactata
Christi ecclesia in
3
est fluctibus et vexata sed non soluta aut submersa. Quia ille
4
imperavit vento et mari, qui se eidem ecclesie promisit usque ad
finem saeculi affuturum. Quicunque ergo de huius maris fluctibus
salvari desiderat, et in profundum abyssi, aeternam videlicet per-
ditionem, demergi pavescit, teneat integre et inviolabiliter fidei

veritatem. Ita enim incipit ipsum opusculum Quicunque vult :
salvus esse, ante omnia opus est ut teneat catholicam fidem. Fides,
qug credentem salvat et in aeternum perire non sinit, non est
ilia, de qua lacob apostolus
5
dicit Et demones credunt et contre- :
B
mescunt et iterum: Fides sine operibus mortua est 7 Sed ilia
: .
potius est, que iuxta apostolum 'Pa.ulum* per dilectionem operatur^;

illam videlicet dilectionem, de qua Dominus ait Qui diligit me, :
sermones meos servat 10 Ille ergo tenet fideliter

" fidem
Dei, qui
.
non solum recte credit de Deo, sed etiam digne diligendo et
agendo promereri desiderat Deum. Fides alio nomine dicitur

credulitas nam apud Grecos fides et credulitas uno nomine
:
12
appellatur, id est, PISTIS . Catholica Grecum nomen est
13
;
interpretatur autem Latino eloquio universalis, quia toto mundo

diffusa ecclesia et toto tempore. Hanc tenet fidem et tenuit ;
u variata. Nam
neque unquam aut tempore mutata est aut
hereticorum fides non potest dici catholica, quia non est publica,
sed privata, nee ubique tenetur, nee semper fuisse monstratur.
Ante omnia ergo summa necessitas est, ut fides vera teneatur.
Ipsa enim opera precedit. Nam sine bonorum operum mentis
1
B. M. Addit. 24,902 '
id est.'
2 '
B. M. Adclit. 24,902 'id est,' but
'
videlicet is written above.
3
Tr. 1532, and B. M. Addit. 24,902 invexata.' '
' '
4
B. M. Addit. 24,902 in but 'ad has been written above
'
it.
'
5
B. M. Addit. 24,902 apostolus Jacob.'
6 7
Ep. S. lac. ii. 19. Ibid. ii. 20.
8
B. M. Addit. 24,902 '
Paulum apostolum.'
9
Gal. v. 6.
w S. loh. xiv. 21 and 24.
11
Tr. 1532, and B. M.
Addit. 24,902 'veraciter.'
12
Tr. 1532
'
apellatur TTyCTic.' line has been drawn through the last A

'
word, and pistis written above it. B. M. Addit. 24,902 has nam fides et
' '
credulitas uno nomine TTfcrc.' 'pistis' has been written above the last word
by the corrector.
13
B. M. Addit. 24,902 est nomen.' '
14
Tr. 1532, and B. M. Addit. 24,902, add 'locis.'
Appendix. 517
1
per fidem iustificatur impitis, sicut dicit apostolus : Credenti in
2
eum, qui iustificat imfium, deputatur fides tins ad iustitiam Ut .
deinde ipsa fides per dilectionem incipiat operari ; ea quippe

sola bona opera dicenda sunt, qug fiunt per dilectionem Dei.
He.c autem necesse est ante cedat fides, ut inde ista, non ab istis
incipiat ilia ; quoniam nullus operatur per dilectionem Dei, nisi
prius credit in Deum. He.c est fides, de qua dicitur In Christo :
enim Ihesu neque circumcisio aliquid valet neqtte praeputium, sed

fides que per dilectionem operatur*. Ergo, ut bona opera sequantur,
precedit fides nee ulla sunt bona opera, nisi qu secuntur, pre-
;
cedente fide. Et ideo credendo in Deum prevenit quisque opera

sua. Existimo enim, inquit apostolus, iustificari hominern per
4
fidem sine operibus . Non enim
de operibus ut iustificetur
gloriatur, nee preponit merita sua, sed fide prevenit opera

fidei
sua. Et quidem temporalis salus communis est et bonis et malis ;
immo, communis est hominibus et iumentis, sicut cantatur in

psalmo : Homines et iumenta salvos fades, Domine 5 . Aeternam
vero salutem quam Dominus promittit dicens :
Qui crediderit et
G
baptizatus fuerit, salvus ertt et de qua propheta ait: Israel ,
salvatus est in Domino salute eterna 7 nullus proculdubio con- ,
sequi valet, nisi per fidem ; et fidem non quamlibet, num quam
8
excogitavit Arrius aut Sabellius vel ceteri heretici, sed catholicam,

id est, universalem. Quam divinitus traditam et inspiratarn
universa semper tenuit et tenebit ecclesia. He.c est enim, de qua
Deus per prophetam dicit lustus autem meus ex fide vivit 9 ; et :
Jo
apostolus testatur dicens : Sine fide impossible est placere Deo .
Qu in tantum omnia bona hominis precedit, ut, nisi ab ipsa et
1
B. M. Adclit. 24,902, adds
'
Paulus.'
2 3 4
Rom. iv. 5. Gal. v. 6. Rom. iii. 28.
5
Ps. xxxvi. A. V. ; xxxv. Vulg. The quotation is either from the Roman
Psalter or the Vetus.
St. Marc. xvi. 16.
7
B. M. Addit. 24,902
'
salutem gternam.' The quotation is from Isaiah
xlv. 17.
8
Tr. 1532, and B. M. Addit. 24,902 non,' and no doubt rightly. In the '
'
latter due partes has been written above in another hand.
'
9
See Habac. ii. 4, where the passage in the Vulgate \s-Justus autem in
fide sua -vivet. But in Heb. x. 38 it is quoted word for word the same as
in the text.
10
Heb. xi. 6.
518 Appendix.
per ipsam, nihil boni in homine inchoari possit. He.c enim

1
primo homini commendatur et traditur ;
et sic ad sacramenta
2
salvus accedit , videlicet, ut exhorcizetur, catechizetur, baptizetur,
3
mensg dominicae societur, et sacri chrismatis unctione per
donum sancti Spiritus consumetur. Quatinus per he.c ecclesie.
incorporatus eruatur de potestate tenebrarum et transferatur in

regnum Filii caritatis Dei, ut deinceps vivere Deo et cum Deo
4 5 G
possit operari. Unde recte de eadem fide subiungitur

7
:
Quam
nisi quisque integrant inviolatamque servaverit, absque dubio in
eternum peribit. Integra et inviolata servanda est fides ; quia
8
nihil de ilia est auferendum, nihil mutandum, sicut in fine
10
libri apocalypsis terribiliter contestatum est ; ubi legitur Si quis :
apposuerit ad hgc, apponet Deus siiper ilium plagas quae scriptae

n et si lz
sunt in libro isto / quis deminuerit^ a^^feretDeus no men eius
de libro vitae . Demunt namque et violant, id est, minuunt et
corrumpunt sacramenta fidei heretici et scismatici ;

et idcirco
I4
eiicit illos foras ecclesia et excludit a se, ut ipsa sine macula
inveniatur ruga. et est, Sicut enim Deus veritas ita ea qug
apostolica ecclesia de Deo docuit, vera sunt. Si aliquid horum
!r> ]
detraxeris aut mutaveris, intrat putredo de veneno serpentis,
nascuntur vermes mendaciorum, et nihil integrum remanebit.
Quia ubi fuerit corruptio falsitatis, non ibi erit integritas veritatis.
Sequitur
17
Fides autem catholica haec est, ut unum Deum in
.
1
Tr. 1532 and B. M. Acldit. 24,902
'
prima.'
2
Tr. 1532 'accedat.'
3
Tr. 1532 ' crismatis.'
4
B. M. Addit. 24,902 omits Filii.' '
5
Tr. 1532 ' claritatis.'
6
B. M. Addit. 24,902 'Deo vivere.'
'
7 '
This passage from Ante omnia ergo
'
to subiungitur' is not found at all
in the Oratorian Commentary.

8 '
T. 1532 always reads nichil.'
9
Tr. 1532 and B. M. Addit. 24,902 'ea.'
10
In B. M. Addit. 24,902 the word is given in Greek characters, and
'
apocalipsis is written above.

'
la
11
Tr. 1532 <
isto libro.' The Vulgate has partem.' '
13 xxii. 18, 19.

" B. M. Addit. 24,902 'eos.'
Apoc.
15
Tr. 1532 'deinseris' apparently; but B. M. Addit. 24,902 'dempseris,'
the right reading doubtless.
1
10
B. M. Addit. 24,902 ' vel.
17 '
Sequitur' is omitted in Tr. 1532 and B. M. Addit. 24,902.
Appendix. 519
1
trinitate et trinitatem in imitate veneremur. Unitas est in
Deitate, trinitas in personis. Veneremur ergo unitatem Deitatis

in trinitate personarum ; veneremur trinitatem personarum in
unitate Deitatis. In qua trinitate tanta est substantiae unitas, ut
aequalitatem teneat, pluralitatem non recipiat ;
tanta personarum
2
distinctio, ut unione non permisceatur . Tres personae unius
sunt essentiae sive naturae, unius virtutis, unius operationis, unius
beatitudinis, atque unius potestatis, ut trina sit unitas et una sit
trinitas. Ita ut ex plenitudine Divinitatis nihil minus in singulis,

3
nihil amplius intelligatur in tribus. Velut si de tribus hominibus
dicamus, quod sint immortales : manifestum est non plus posse

4 3
vivere simul tres quam singulos, nee minus singulos quos totos
tres ; quorum trium una est immortalitas. Aut si aequaliter sint
sapientes non 6 plus sapiunt simul quam
:
singuli, sed tanta est in
unoquoque sapientia, quanta in tribus. Si hoc ergo in creatura
invenitur, quanto magis in creatore, in Patre scilicet et Filio et
Spiritu Sancto cui est aeterna et incommutabilis unitas, qui 7

:
est indifferens trinitas ; unus Deus, unum lumen, unumque prin-
cipium. Trinitas dicitur quasi tri unitas, id est, trium unitas.

Hoc enim vera
est trinitas, tres unum esse. Unde Johannes
apostolus dicit Et 8 : tres unum sunt 9 .
Sequitur
10
.
Neqiie con-
fundentes personas, neque substantiam n separantes, Sabellius, quia
intellexit unum i2
esse trinitatis substantiam, ideo confundens
J3
personas, ipsum sibi Patrem, ipsum sibi Filium, ipsum Spiritum
Sanctum, esse dicebat. Nos vero non nomina tantum sed etiam
nominum u proprietates, id est, personas confitemur. Nee Pater 15
1
Tr. 1532 and B. M. Addit. 24,902 'Una,' but in the latter 'unitas' has
been written above as a correction.
a
B. M. Addit. 24,902 permisceantur.'
'
3
For 'amplius' Tr. 1532 reads 'plus.'
4
For 'quos' B. M. Addit. 24,902 reads 'quam.'
'
5 ' '
For totos Tr. 1532 reads omnes.'
'
6 '
Non is omitted in Tr. 1532 and B. M. Addit. 24,902.
8
7
Tr. 1532
'
que.' B.M. Addit. 24,902 adds 'hi.'
9 10
i
Epist. S. lohan. v. 8. Tr. 1532 omits 'Sequitur.'
J1 '
but there is some appearance of erasure
B. M. Addit. 24,902 snbstantia'
;
above the Probably the mark of contraction has been erased.

final a.
12
Tr. 1532 and B. M. Addit. 24,902 'unam.'
13 " Tr.
Tr. 1532 adds 'sibi.' 1532 adds 'potestates et.'
15
Tr. 1532 'Neque Patris,' B. M. Addit. 24,902 'Neque Pater.' In the
520 Appendix.
J
aut aut Spiritus Sancti personam aliquando excludit ; nee
Filii
rursus Filius aut Spiritus Sanctus Patris nomen personamque 2
recipit. Sed Pater semper Pater, Filius semper Filius, Spiritus

Sanctus semper Spiritus Sanctus. E
Arrius, quiacontrario autem 3
cognovit tres personas, idcirco et tres asseruit divisas substantias.

Sed nos detestantes Arrium unam eandemque dicimus trinitatis
esse substantiam, et unum in tribus personis fatemur Deum. Im-
4
pietatem quoque Sabellii declinamus tres personas sub proprietate ,
distinguimus. Quia Pater et Filius et Spiritus Sanctus substantia

unum sunt, personis ac nominibus distinguntur. Substantia est
unius cuiusque rei essentia vel natura. Perquam omne, quod 5 est,
subsistere et esse cognoscitur. Sequitur . Alia est enim persona
Patris, alia Filii, alia Spiritus Sancti, sed Patris et Filii et Spiritus
Sancti una est Divinitas, aequalis gloria, co-aeterna maiestas. Alius
est in persona Pater, alius in persona Filius, alius in persona Spiritus
Sanctus. Non est alius in Deitate, non est alius in gloria. Alius est
Pater et alius Filius, quia non est ipse Pater, qui Filius. Non est
tamen aliud Pater et aliud Filius, quia hoc est Pater quod Filius.
Pater enim genitor est, non genitus. Filius genitus est, non genitor.
Spiritus Sanctus non est genitor, quia non est Pater; non est
genitus, quia non est Filius sed procedens est, quia Spiritus est.
:
Hoc est tamen Filius quod Pater, quia Deus, quia creator, quia
7
omnipotens. Aequalis ergo gloria trinitatis, quia non est maior
in gloria Pater quam Filius aut Spiritus Sanctus, non est minor s
gloria Spiritus Sancti quam Patris aut Filii. Item coaeterna

maiestas est trinitatis, quia non est anterior Pater Filio aut Spiritu
Sancto, non est posterior Spiritus Sanctus Patre aut Filio.
Personas dicere in trinitate necessitas fecit disputationis contra
hereticos. Nam cum dixeris tres sunt et interrogatus fueris quid

9
sunt tres ,
nihil omnino respondendum restat nisi personae.
'
latter the last letters of 'Pater
'appear have been altered, and 'enim
to has
'
been written above neque by a different hand.
'
1 '
Tr. 1532 and B. M. Addit. 24,902 omit aliquando.'
2
Tr. 1532 'personam nomenque.'
3
Tr. 1532 and B. M. Addit. 24,902 omit '
autem.'
1
Tr. 1532 and B. M. Addit. 24,902 '
declinantes.'
5 B
Tr. 1532 omits 'quod.' Tr. 1532 omits 'Sequitur.'
7 8
B. M. Addit. 24,902 adds '
est.' B. M. Addit. 24,902 minor '
est.'
9
B. M. Addit. 24,902 tres '
sunt.'
Appendix. 521
Aliud enim quid respondeas, nihil habebis, quia non potest

1
dicere tres dii aut tres substantiae aut aliquid huiusmodi, quod
absit Dicta est 2 autem persona, quasi per se una eo quod per
se sit. Pater et Filius et Spiritus Sanctus inseparabiles sunt etiam
" 4
in personis. Quia, sicut ttbique est Pater, ita ubique Filius,
n
ubique et Spiritus Sanctus. Inseparabile est etiam opus trinitatis;
quia quglibet persona, sicut sine aliis personis esse non potest,
ita sine aliis non operatur; et nihil seorsum agit inseparabilis
G
caritas. Sequitur Qua/is Pater, tails Filius, talis Spiritus
.
Sanctus. Hoc propter necessitatem contra hereticos usurpatum

est, qui dissimilem Deo Patri P'ilium asserebant, dissimilemque
Spiritum Sanctum. Nam

qualitas de Deo proprie non dicitur,
quern, in quantum possumus, intelligere debemus sine qualitate
bonum, sine quantitate magnum, sine indigentia creatorem, sine
situ presentem, sine habitu omnia continentem, sine loco ubique
totum, sine tempore sempiternum, sine ulla sui mutatione

mutabilia facientem, nihilque pacientem 7 . In nullo ergo dis-
similis Patri Filius, in nullo dissimilis Patri et Filio Spiritus

Sanctus :
quia in quibus est una Deitas, non est ulla diversitas.
6
Sequitur . Increatus Pater, increattis Filius, increatus Spiritus
Sanctus. Nihil in trinitate creatum, quia tota trinitas unus est
creator. Omnis .itaque substantia quae Deus non est, creatura
est, et quae creatura non est, Deus est. Nulla igitur differentia
est in Deitate trinitatis
; quoniam quod Deo minus
est, Deus
non est.
Sequitur Immensus Pater, immensus
.
Filius, immensus
Spiritus Sanctus. Immensus est Deus trinitatis 8 quia nulla ,
ratione nulla estimatione metiri valet. Mundo non capitur sic :
replet mundum, ut ipse contineat mundum,. non contineatur a

mundo, sine labore regens, sine onere continens omnia non ;
tamen per spacia 9 locorum quasi mole diffusus, sed in solo celo
totus et in sola terra totus et in parte totus et per cuncta totus ;
1
B. M. Addit. 24,902 nam.' '
2
Tr. 1532 and B. M. Addit. 24,902 omit *est."
3
Tr. 1532 omits 'ita.'
'
4
B. M. Addit. 24,902 omits the second ubique.'
5 6
B. M. Addit. 24,902 'etiam est.' Tr. 1532 omits 'Sequitur.'
7
B. M. Addit. 24,902 'patientem.'
8
Tr. 1532 and B. M. Addit. 24,902
'
trinitas.'
9
B. M. Addit. 24,902 spatia.'
'
522 Appendix.
l 2
in nullo contentus loco, sed in seipso ubique totus . Ita Pater,
3
Sanctus; unus Deus trinitas
ita Filius, ita Spiritus Est namque .
ubique, quia nusquam est absens in seipso autem, quia non ;
continetur eis, quibus presens est, tanquam sine his esse non
possit. Qui cum sit ubique totus per Divinitatis presentiam, non
est ubique per habitationis gratiam. Unde non dicimus, Pater
noster, qui es ubique, cum procul dubio verum sit, sed Pater
noster, qui es in celis : in sanctis, videlicet, angelis et sanctis

omnibus quibus esse dicitur, non solum per presentiam suae
*, in
5
maiestatis, sed etiam per gratiam su habitationis. Sequitur .
Aeternus Pater, aeternus Filius, aeternus Spiritus Sanctus : et

tamen non tres aeterni, sed unus aeternus ; sicut non ires increati,
nee tres immensi, sed unus increatus et unus immensus. In Deitate
trinitatis quod est esse perpetuum est. Nee Pater unquam fuit
sine Filio, quia aeternaliter, id est sine initio, genuit Filium, et sicut
semper quoque Filius cum

6
semper Deus, ita semper extat Pater :
Patre, quia aeternaliter genitus est a Patre :

semper etiam Spiritus
Sanctus cum Patre et Filio, quia aeternaliter ex Patre et Filio pro-
cedit. Non sunt tamen tres aeterni, nee tres increati, nee tres im-
mensi ; quia totius sanctae trinitatis, sicut una est natura, ita una est
increatio, una immensitas, unaque 7 aeternitas. Sequitur 5 Similiter .
omnipotens Pater, omnipotens Filius, omnipotens Spiritus Sanctus : et

tamen non tres omnipotens, sed unus omnipotens. Omnipotens dicitur
Deus, quia omnia potest, non patiendo aliquid, quod non vult,
Apud Deum
s
sed faciendo quodcunque vult sicut scriptum est ,
:
9
autem omnia possibilia sunt Omnipotens est, quia omnia quae
.
10
sunt, illius potestate acceperunt ut sint, illius potestate tenentur
1
'in' B. M. Addit. 24,902 reads 'et.'
For
2
B.M. Addit. 24,902 totus ubique.'
'
3
B M. Addit. 24,902 omits unus Deus trinitas.'
'
4
For 'omnibus' Tr. 1532 and B. M. Addit. 24,902 read 'hominibus/ and
rightly.
5
Tr. 1532 omits 'Sequitur.'
6 '
Tr. 1532 and B. M. Addit. 24,902 exislit.'
7
B. M. Addit. 24,902 omits 'que.'
8
This is not in the Oratorian Commentary; it seems to be taken from
'
St. Augustine, de Civ. Dei, lib. v. cap. 10, Dicitur omnipotens faciendo quod
vult, non patiendo quod non vult.'
9
St. Matt. xix. 26. 10
B. M. Addit. 24,902 '
continentur.'
Appendix. 523
ne concidant. Hoc Pater, hoc Filius, hoc 1

Spiritus Sanctus.
Nee tamen tres omnipotentes, sed unus omnipotens, quia totius
sanctae sic est una omnipotentia, sicut una essentia".
trinitatis,
Ita Dens
Pater, Z)eus Films, Deus Spiritus Sanctus : et tamen non
tres Dii, sed unus est Deus. Ita Dominus Pater, Dominus Filius,
Dominus Spiritus Sanctus : et tamen non tres Domini, sed unus est
Dominus. Totius sanctae trinitatis una Deitas et una 8 Dominatio.
4 5
Sciendum vero quod Deus dicitur a se ,
Dominus ad creaturas
quibus dominatur ; Deus, quia colendus est Dominus, quia ;
solus timendus est; Deus religiosorum, Dominus vero servorum.
Sequitur
G
:
Quia sicut singillatim unam quamque personam Deum
et Dominum confiteri Christiana veritate compellimur ; ita tres
7
Deos atit tres Dominos dicere Catholica religione prohibenmr.
Unam quamque personam in sancta trinitate singillatim, hoc est
singulariter, et Deum et Dominum confiteri oportet. Ita nos

8
dicere fides Christiana compellit. Quia nisi ita dixerimus,
Christiani esse non possumus. Et tamen alium Deum aut
Dominum dicere Patrem, alium Deum aut Dominum dicere
Filium, alium Deum aut Dominum dicere Spiritum Sanctum,
prohibet nos Catholica religio. Quia, si ita dixerimus, nee
Catholici nee religiosi esse poterimus. Sed tit Christiani simus
10
et Patrem Deum
9
atque Catholici, dicamus vel pocius credamus
et Filium Deum et Spiritum Sanctum Deum, et simul non tres
Deos, sed unum Deum, qui substantia et natura sit veraciter

unus. Sequitur. Pater a nullo factus nee creahts nee genitus ;
est
Filius a Patre solo est ; non factus nee creatiis, sed genitus ;
Spiritus Sanctus a Patre et Filio, non factus nee creatus nee
genitus, sed procedens. Pater a nullo est, quia non habet patrem,
" n
de quo sit. Nulla enim omnino res est qug seipsam gignit ,
ut
I 2
B. M. Addit. 24,902 adds ' et.' B. M. Addit. 24,902 adds '
Sequitur.'
3
B. M. Addit. 24,902 adds ' est.'
* '
Tr. 1532 and B. M. Addit. 24,902 dicatur.'
5 '
B. M. Addit. 24,902 has rightly, as also the Oratorian Commentary, ad se.'
6 '
Tr. 1532 omits Sequitur.'
7
B. M. Addit. 24,902 Deos ac Dominos.
'
8
B. M. '
Addit. 24,902 fides dicere.'
9
24,902 add
'
Tr. 1532 arid B. M. Addit. religiosi et.'
10
B. M. Addit. 24,902 potius.'
'
12
II
Tr. 1532 omits
'
omnino.' B. M. Addit. 24,902 'gignat.'
524 Appendix.
sit. Filius autem de Patre

est, ut sit atque ut illi coaeternus
sit Cognoscamus itaque
'. Filium Dei Filium Dei esse ; cog-
noscamus a se ipso non esse, sed genitum esse a Patre, Patrem
vero ipsum ingenitum esse, a nullo esse, a nullo vitam accepisse ~.
Vita est enim ipse Pater 3 vita est * ipse Filius ; sed ille de ,
5
nullo vita, iste vita de vita Sed talis qualis ilia, tanta quanta .
ilia,hoc omnino quod ilia Filius a Patre solo est genitus .

;
Spiritus autem Sanctus ab utroque, id est Patre et Filio, pro-

cedens, Spiritus amborum est. Filius vero solius est Patris. Et
7
he.c est causa, quae distinguit inter nativitatem Filii et pro-
cessionem Spiritus Sancti. Filius sic est de Patre, quomodo

natus, non quomodo datus Spiritus vero Sanctus sic est de :
Patre simul et Filio, quomodo datus, non quomodo natus, hoc

est, donum amborum. nascendo procedit, Spiritus Itaque Filius
vero Sanctus procedendo non nascitur, ne sint duo filii. Nam
8
cum sit et Pater et Spiritus, et
9
Filius et
'
spiritus, et Pater
sanctus et Filius sanctus, proprie tamen ipse vocatur Spiritus

Sanctus, tanquam sanctitas coessentialis et consubstantialis am-
n 12
borum Sequitur .
ergo Pater non tres patres, units
. Unns
Filius non tres filii, imus Spiritus Sanctus, non tres spiritus sandi.
Unus est in sancta trinitate tantummodo Pater, qui genuit
Filium ;
unus tantummodo Filius, qui genitus est a Patre ;
unus
tantummodo Spiritus Sanctus, qui ex utroque procedit. Proprium
ergo Patris est, quia genuit ; proprium Filii, quia genitus est ;
13
proprium Spiritus Sancti, quia procedit . Haec sunt relativa
substance from Augustine, in loannis Evan, xlviii.

1
This is in St. 6.
2 3 '
Tr. 1532 accipere.' '
Tr. 1532 Pater ipse.'
* '
B. M. Adclit. 24,902 omits est.'
5
See St. Aug. con. sermonem Arianorum.
6
From 'Pater a nullo est, quia' to 'ilia' is not in the Oratorian Com-
mentary.
7
Tr. 1532 'hoc.'
B
M. Addit. 24,902 rightly omit this 'et.'
Tr. 1532 and B.
9
Tr. 1532 omits this 'et' also.
J0
B. M. Addit. 24,902 has 'Filius spiritus' no doubt rightly, omitting the
'et.'
11
This passage from nam '
cum sit' to '.amborum' is from St. Augustine,
de Civ. Dei, xi. 24.
13
13 '
From Unus '
est
'
to
'
procedit is not in the Oratorian Commentary.

Appendix. 525
l
nomina, in quibus trinitas dinoscitur : Pater videlicet et Films
et Spiritus Sanctus. Qu ideo relativa dicuntur, quia Pater ad
alium refertur, hoc est ad Filium non enim sibi ipsi est Pater, :
sed alteri, hoc est Filio. Similiter Filius ad Patrem refertur.

Sed et Spiritus Sanctus vel donum, quod 2 dicitur, refertur ad
Patrem et Filium, a quibus procedit vel datur. Alia ergo sunt
nomina substantiae, hoc est unitatis, et alia sunt nomina per-
sonarum, hoc est trinitatis. Substantialia, in quacunque persona
dicantur, non referuntur ad aliam sed ad seipsam.
'',
Relativa
vero semper, ut dictum est, ad invicem referuntur. Dicitur
4
Filius ab apostolo Dei virtus et Dei sapientia Sed non ita est .
relativum in eo virtus et sapientia, sicut est quod dicitur Verbum

aut Filius. Virtus enim et sapientia in Deo substantia est. Et
ita dicitur Filius sapientia Patris, quomodo dicitur lumen Patris ;
id
est, ut, quemadmodum lumen de lumine et utrumque unum lumen,

sic intelligatur sapientia de sapientia et utrumque una sapientia.
5
Pater igitur et Filius simul una essentia et una magnitude et una
virtus et una sapientia. Sed non Pater et Filius simul ambo
unum Verbum. Quia non simul ambo unus Filius sed Filius :
factiis est nobis sapientia a Deo* De qua cum aliquid in scripturis

'.
dicitur, Filius nobis insinuatur. Spiritus quoque Sanctus sapientia.

Et simul non tres sapientiae, sed una sapientia, Pater et Filius et
Spiritus Sanctus. Sequitur
7
. Et in hac trinitate nihil prius aut
posterius nihil maius aut minus, sed totae tres personae co-aeternae
sibi sunt et co-aequales. Ita ut per omnia, sicut iam dictum est, et
trinitas in unitate et unitas in trinitate* mneranda sit. Haec
9
trinitas unusDeus; quia unus est, non potest
est et esse
diversus. Quia una natura non potest se ipsa esse prior aut
posterior, maior aut minor. In hac itaque trinitate nihil est prius
aut posterius, quia totg tres personae cogternae sibi sunt, id est,
simul aeternae. Non est Pater prior Filio, non est Filius posterior
Patre, non est Spiritus Sanctus posterior Patre et Filio. Sed
'
1
B. M. Addit. 24,902 omits et.'
'
2 '
B. M. Addit. 24,902 for quod reads '
cum.'
3 4
Tr. 1532 'alium.' I Cor. i. 24.
' ' ' '
5
Tr. 1532 omits 'simul and adds est after una.'
7
i Cor. i. 30. Tr. 1532 omits 'Sequitur.'
8
B. M.
Addit. 24,902 'unitas in trinitate et trinitas in imitate.'
8
Tr. 1532 inserts ' se ipsa,' but a mark has been made under it.
526 Appendix.
Pater aeternus initio Pater; Filius sine initio Patri co-

sine
aeternus; Spiritus Sanctus sine initio Patri et Filio co-aeternus.
Aeterna quippe est generatio Patris, aeterna nativitas Filii ex
Patre, aeterna processio Spiritus Sancti ex Patre et Filio. Nihil
*
enim in hac trinitate maius aut minus, quia totg
personae tres
sibi sunt co-aequales, idsimul aequales. Non ibi est Filius

est,
minor 2 Patre, nee Spiritus Sanctus minor Patre et Filio. Sed
quantus Pater, tantus Filius, tantus Spiritus Sanctus. Filius per
omnia aequalis Patri, Spiritus Sanctus per omnia s Patri et Filio
co-aequalis. Quapropter qui unam Divinitatem Patris et Filii
et Spiritus Sancti confitemur, diversum in hac trinitate ordinem

non recipimus. Quia increata et inaestimabilis trinitas, quae
5
unius 4 est aeternitatis et glorie nee tempus nee gradum vel
posterioris recipit vel prioris. Nescit hie ordinem fides, nescit
discretum Patris et Filii et Spiritus Sancti honorem, nee aliquem
in Deo invenit gradum. Nusquam secundum, nusquam tertium
Deum legimus. Primum legimus, primum ac solum audivimus.
Nam et Filius, quamvis ex Patre sit, tamen primum ac prin-
cipium esse se dicit. Omnimodis ergo et trinitas in unitate et
unitas in trinitate veneranda est.
(i
Quia trinitas est in unitate

persona et una est in trinitate substantia. Quoniam unus est
7
Deus, sed tamen trinitas. Nee confuse accipiendum est quod ,
ait Apostolus : Ex
quo omnia, per quern omnia^ in quo omnia
s
.
nee deis multis, sed ipsi gloria in saecula saeculorum. Amen '.
10
Sequitur Qui vult ergo salmis esse, ita de trinitate sentiat. Sed
.
necessarium est ad aeternam salutem, ut incarnationem quoque

Domini nostri Ihesu Christi
u credat. Sicut
fideliter fideliter
credenda est Divinitas regnantis, ita fideliter credenda est

humanitas salvantis. Quia aequalis periculi est de mysterio
1
Tr. 1532 and B. M. Addit. 24,902 for 'enim' read 'etiam.'
2 '
Tr. 1532 maior.'
'
M. per omnia Spiritus Sanctus.'
3
E. Addit. 24,902
5
*
B. M. Addit. 24,902
'
unus.' Tr. -1532 '
aeternitalis et gloriae est.'
Tr. 1532 and B. M. Addit. 24,902 'trina.'
7
B. M. Addit. 24,902 omits est.'
' 8
Rom. xi. 36.
' '
8
'Amen is in a different hand. This passage from Sed Pater aeternus' to
' '
saeculorum is
peculiar to this Commentary. It is not in the Oratorian.
10 u Tr.
Tr. 1532 omits 'Sequitur.' 1532 adds
'
unus-quis-que.'
Appendix. 527
* 3
incarnationis prave
l
sentire et de Divinitatis archano male
intelligere. Nihil enim iustius, quam ut salvns non sit, qui
salutis mysterio derogare non timuerit. Ihesus nomen est heb-
reum ; interpretatur autem in latino salutaris sive salvator.
Christus grece dicitur, quod transfertur in 4 unctus ab unctione,

fi
id est, chrismate ; hebraice vero dicitur Messias. Sequitur .
Est ut credamus et confiteamur, quia Dominus

ergo fides recta
noster Ihesus Christus, Dei Films, Deiis et homo est. Filius Dei
Deus homo factus est, ut in singularitate personae copulans
utramque naturam mediator Dei et hominum hominibus appa-
reret, verus Deus, verus homo, unus Christus. Utraque ergo
natura in eo est credenda et confitenda, videlicet divina et
humana, qui factus est nobis redemptio, sacerdos

redemptor et
et oblatio. In illo enim nostra portio, quia nostra caro et sanguis,
ut, ubi regnat nostra portio, nos quoque glorificemur. Nullum
maius donum prestare potuit 7 Deus hominibus, quam quod
Verbum suum, per quod condidit omnia, fuit illis caput et illis 8
ei tanquam membra
coaptavit, ut esset Filius Dei et Filius
hominis, unus Deus cum Patre, unus homo cum hominibus.

Sequitur
B
, Deus )0 ex substantia Patris ante saecula, homo n ex
12
substantia matris in saeculo natus :
perfectus Deus, perfectus homo
ex anima rationali et humana carne siibsistens. Essentialiter
natus est de Patre, et essentialiter conceptus natusque de matre,
ut esset unius naturg cum Patre et unius natur? cum virgine ;
consubstantialis Patri secundum Divinitatem, consubstantialis

matri secundum humanam infirmitatem ;
de substantia Patris ante
saecula genitus, de substantia matris in saeculo natus ; perfectus
13
Deus, quia indissimilis Deo Patri, perfectus quoque homo, quia
similis homini matri. Quae mater ita ilium salva virginitate genuit,
sicut salva virginitate concepit. Verus enim Deus verus factus est
homo ; quia omnia nostra suscepit, quae in nobis ipse creavit, id
2
I
Tr. 1532 'male.' B. M. Addit. 24,902 'ut.'
3 *
Tr. 1532 'prave.' Tr. 1532 adds 'latinum.'
5 '
Tr. 1532 omils Sequitur.' Tr. 1532 for 'ergo' has 'vero.'
7
B. M. Addit. 24,902 potuit prestare.'
'
8 '
Tr. 1532 and B. M. Addit 24,902 illos.'
9 10
B.M. Addit. 24,902 omits 'et.' B. M. Addit. 24,902 adds 'est.'
II 12
B. M. Addit. -24,902 et homo est.'
'
Tr. 1532 adds 'est.'
13
Tr. IJ32 and B. M. Addit. 24,902 non '
dissimilis.'
528 Appendix.
est carnem et animam rationalem. Propter quod perfectum eum

Deum et perfectum hominem confitemur 1
Aequalis Patri .
secundum Divinitatem, minor Patre secundum humanitatem. Ideo

aequalis et minor, quia Deus et homo 2
, aequalis Patri in forma
Dei, sicut Apostolus forma Dei esset, non
dicit :
Qui cum in
rapinam arbitratus est esse se aequalem Deo*. Minor Patre in

forma servi, de qua idem Apostolus continue subiungit Sed :
4
semet ipsum exinanivit, formam servi accipiens . Unde et ipse
Dominus in aequalem se Patri in Divinitate esse
evangelio
ostendens ait: Ego unum sumus 5 Et iterum minorem
et Pater .
se Patre in humanitate esse confirmans dicit, quia Pater maior me

est*. Qui, licet Deus sit et homo, non duo tamen, sed unus est
Christus, Non est alter Christus in Deitate et alter in humani-
tate, quia non sunt duae personae, sed una. Deus enim Verbum
non accepit personam hominum 7 sed naturam 8 ut in , singularitate
personae tota humanitas suscepta unus Christus sit, et unus
Filius Dei atque hominis. In quo sicut duas credimus naturas,
ita duas naturales voluntates et duas naturales operationes u in-
separabiliter, inconfuse, et has duas voluntates, non contrarias,
sed pocius humanam eius voluntatem subiectam divinae eius
atque omnipotenti voluntati. Nam salvator humanam

sicut
naturam propterea suscepit, ut salvaret, ita et humanam volun-
10
tatem suscipiendo Sequitur Unus autem non con-
salvavit. .
u sed
versione Divinitatis in carnem adsumptione humanitatis in
12
Deum. Conversio mutatio dicitur. Non ergo est conversa, id
1
B. M. Addit. 24,902 inserts Sequitur.'
'
3
2
Tr. 1532 and B. M. Addit. 24,902 add <
est.' Phil. ii. 6.
4
Ibid. ii.
7.
*
St. John x. 30. Tr. 1532 instead of 'Ego . . . sumus' has 'Ego in Patre
et Pater in me est.'
'
John xiv. 28. From Ideo aequalis' to maior me est is peculiar to

6 ' '
St.
this Commentary. It is not in the Oratorian. In substance it is from

1
St. Augustine. B. M. Addit. 24,902 adds 'Sequitur.
7
Tr. 1532 and B. M. Addit. 24,902 'hominis.'
6 M. Addit. 24,902 '
Tr. 1532 and B. add, as the Oratorian Commentary, et
persona Divinitatis accepit substandard carnis.'

8
Tr. 1532 instead of 'voluntates et duas naturales operationes' has
'
potenlias.' ;
10
11
Tr. 1532 and B. M. Addit. 24,902 'came.'
13
B. M. Addit. 24,902 ' est ergo.'
Appendix. 529
est, mutata Divinitas in carnem sed manens quod erat suscepit

;
carnem. Humanitas quoque assumpta est in Deum, non con-

sumpta. Homo Deo accessit, Deus a se non recessit. Adqui-
1
evit esse quod non erat, non desiit esse quod erat. Sequitur .
Unus omnino, non confusione substantiae, sed unitate personae.

Confusio dicitur permixtio, sicut solent duo liquores immisceri 2 ,
ut neutrum servet integritatem suam. In Christo ergo non sunt

permixte substantiae, quia servat utraque cum alterius com-
munione proprietatem suam in singularitate personae. Sequitur *.
Nam sicut anima rationalis et caro unus est homo, ita Deus et
homo unus est Christus. Ut 3 in quolibet homine non est una
4
persona anima, et anima caro, sed ex anima et carne unus est
homo, ita in Christo, non sunt duae personae, sed una divina,
quae incarnata est. Nam sicut hominis personam gestat anima,
quia utique corpus mortuum non dicitur persona sicut nee lapis
aut 5 lignum, ita Christi personam gestat Divinitas, assumptrix
fi
humanitatis propter quod utraque substantia dicitur et creditur
,
unicus et unigenitus Filius Dei. Unde et Verbum propter

carnem homo est, et caro propter Verbum Deus est. Sequitur *.
Qui passus est pro salute nostra, descendit ad inferos, surrexit
a mortuis, ascendit ad caelos, sedet ad dexteram Dei Patris omni-
potentis, inde venturus iudicare vivos et mortuos. Passus est, sed in
7 8
sola assumpta substantia. Gratia enim pro omnibus gustavit
9
mortem, tradens ei
proprium corpus quamvis ,
naturaliter ipse
vita sit et resurrectio mortuorum. Descendit ad inferos, ut morte
ineffabili potentia proculcata spoliaret infernum, et antiquorum
iustorum animas, qui, quamlibet in loco tranquillitatis, ibi tamen
detinebantur, ad paradisi amoena reduceret. Tertia die resur-
rexit a mortuis in eadem carne, qua passus fuerat, ut esset
1 2
Tr. 1532 omits 'Sequitur.' B. M. Adclit. 24,902 'ita misceri.'
3
B. M. Addit. 24,902 'Sicut.'
*
Tr. 1532 and B. M. Addit. 24,902 give the right reading
'
alia.'
6 '
B. M. Addit. 24,902 nee.'
6
B. M. Addit. 24,902
'
Divinitatis,' but it has been underscored, and
'
'
humanitatis written above
by the corrector. it
7
Tr. 1532 and B. M. Addit. 24,902 add 'Dei.
8 '
Tr. 1532 hominibus.'
9
B. M. Addit. 24,902 corpus proprium.'
'
10 '
Tr. 1532 and B. M. Addit. 24,902 surrexit.'
Mm
530 Appendix.
1
primogenitus a mortuis et primitiae dormientium, et faceret
viam humanae naturae ad immortalitatis recursum. Ascendit ad
coelos, quia ideo humiliatus est Deus in homine, ut homo
exaltaretur in Deo. Sedet vero ad dexteram Patris, id est, regnat
2
in beatitudine
superna Sedere enim regnare est. Dextera
.
vero Patris beatitude est sempiterna. Inde venturus est* iudicare

vivos et mortuos ; quia visionem humanitatis omnibus presenta-
turus est, ut in iudicio appareat conspicuus in ea forma, qua
iudicatus est. Vivos autem et rnortuos, qui iudicandi sunt, eos
intelligere debemus, quos dies iudicii vivos invenerit, et eos, qui
iam ante obierunt. Sequitur 4 Ad cuius adventum omnes homines .
resurgere habent cum corporibus suis, et reddituri sunt de factis

propriis rationem.- Adveniente Domino, resuscitantur mortui
cum corporibus suis, ut unusquisque in eo corpore, quo bona vel
mala gessit, reddat 5 rationem gestorum suorum, et in eo corpore.
7
per quod operatus est, recipiat retributionem factorum suorum .
Sequitur Et, qui bona egerunt, ibunt in vitam aeternam, qui

*.
vero mala, in ignem aeternum. Tune enim 8 iusti non solum in

animabus beatificati, sed etiam in corporibus glorificati, posside-
bunt vitam aeternam, absque ullo metu mortis cum iucunditate 9
10
etgaudio immortalitatis. Tune etiam hi, qua mala egerunt, illo
extremo iudicio mittentur in ignem aeternum :
qui ignis ideo
dicitur aeternus, quia eis aeternos exhibet cruciatus
n et nunquam
finietur, nee eos cruciare Multi egerunt mala, qui 12 non
cessabit.
ibunt in ignem aeternum, quia ante mortem suam veram peni-
tudinem de peccatis suis gesserunt ; sed hie de illis dicitur, qui
mala egerunt, et sine emendatione in malis perseveraverunt.
Sequitur. Haec est fides catholica, quam nisi quisque fideliter
firmiterque crediderit, salmcs esse non poterit. Fideliter credamus,

13
ut in fide non erremus, firmiter credamus ut de creditis non
z
I
B. M. Addit. 24,902 'ex.' Tr. 1532 sempiterna.
' 1
'
3
B. M. Addit. 24,902 omits est.'
*
Tr. 1532 omits 'Sequitur. 5
5
Tr. 1532 adds 'uni Deo.' B. M. Addit. 24,902 ' retribuat.'
7
From '
et in' to 'suorum' is omitted from the text of Tr. 1532, but is
inserted in the margin.

8 ' ' ' 9
Tr. 1532 for enim reads vero.' B. M. Addit. 24,902 '
iocundidate.'
10 Tr. 1532 and B. M. Addit. 24,902 'qui.'
II 12 '
Tr. 1532 eos cruciet etenio cruciatu.' Tr. 1532 adds et.'
13 Tr. 1532 and B. M. Addit. 24,902 for 'firmiter' read 'fideliter.'
Appendix. 531
dubitemus, si ad aeternam salutem volumus pervenire, ubi cum

angelis Deum laudantes de illius laude vivamus, de illius laude
et nos gloriamur. Amen 1
.
J-
Commentary on Athanasian Creed in MS. 1012, Latin^

the
Bibliotheque Nationale^ Paris. It commences on f. 59

and ends onf. 66.
cum exposicione Quicunque vult salvus

INCIPIT Fides chatolica
esse, ante omnia opus est ut teneat chatolicam fidem. Chatolica
dicitur universalis: et quid universalis, nisi quod universa ecclesia
'
3
debet tenere . Fides dicitur ab eo quod fies in dies .
Quam
4
nisi quisque integram inviolatamque servaverit. Id est, unus
5
quisque singulis per se. Integram inviolatamque servaverit, hoc
est, incorruptam :
quod nihil inde minuas, nihil addas. Absque
dubio, hoc est, sine dubio in aeternam G peribit. Fides autem
chatolica haec est aequalis, ut unum Deum in trinitate et trinitatem
in unitate veneremur. Quid est hoc nisi ut unum Deum credamus
7
in tres personas, Patrem et Filium et Spiritum Sanctum ? Pro
8
quid dicitur persona ? Qui per se sonat. Quando dicis Patrem,
1
M.
Addit. 24,902 adds ' Explicit Expositio.'
B.
2 '
This note upon ' chatolica appears also in the Commentary attributed to
Fortunatus and in that of Bruno.
3
Fides is derived from fieri by St. Augustine also, Sen. Ixxxii. 22:' Ipsa
fides in Latino sermone dicitur appellata, quia fit quod dicitur.' Similarly in
Sermon No. 264 in the Appendix to his works, attributed by the Benedictine
editors on the authority of several manuscripts and by Baluze to Caesarius of
Aries Fides a fit, id est ab eo quod fiat, nomen accepit.'
:
'
4 ' '
H. appears to have been written just before Id and afterwards erased.
'
Clearly the scribe at first intended to write Hoc.'

5
So the MS.
'
6
So the MS. '
may be omitted.
Perditionem
7
The accusative where we should have expected the ablative. So we have
1
afterwards :
'
in carnem animam rationabilem abuisse, '
in earn carnem, que
resurrexit,' and tres personas in unitatem,' and repeatedly
'
prius fuerat,
1
pro quid.' There are several instances of the same peculiarity, as I have
noticed, in the first Commentary on the Athanasian Creed in Troyes, 804.
8
Probably for
'
quia.' The last letter of a word is frequently omitted in

this MS.
M m 2
532 Appendix.
personam dicis
quando dicis Filium, personam dicis quando
: :
dicis Spiritum Sanctum, personam dicis, quia unus quisque per se

sonat. Et istas tres personas in unitatem veneremur, hoc est,
adoremus. Sequitur. Neque confundentes personas. Qui dicit,
x
ipse est Pater, ipse Filius, ipse et Spiritus Sanctus, confundat
z
personas, qui de tres unam facit. Alia est enim persona Patris,
alia Filii, alia et Spiritus Sancti. Quia superius dixi, et Pater
per se, et Filius per se, et Spiritus Sanctus per secundum
se,
personas dico. Sed Patris et Filii et Spiritus Sancti una est

divinitas,aequalis gloria, quo-aeterna maiestas. Nullus maior,
nullus minor, sed tote tres persone quo-aeterne sibi sunt et quo-
aequales. Qualis Pater, talis Filius, talis et Spiritus Sanctus. Id

est, secundum divinitatem aequales sibi sunt. Increatus Pater,
increatus Filius, increatus et Spiritus Sanctus. Dicuntur increati,
quia fuerunt creati, quia nee initium habent nee finem.
nunquam
Sed tamen angeli creati sunt, et ominis 3 anima creatura est, et
homo creatura est, et omnem rem quamcunque vides, creatura
est, et tamen abent 4 inicium, sed non abent finem. Inmensus
Pater, inmensus Filius, inmensus Spiritus Sanctus. Quid hoc ?
5
Inmensus dicitur, quia nulla ilium potest mensura , quia de ipso
scriptum est :
Ego celum et terram implebo ;
et alibi Celum :
7 8 9 10
palmum mitigens et tram pugillo concludens ;
et rursum
1
So the MS.
Obviously 'personas' is understood. We have afterwards de
2 '
tres personas
nnam ' '
faciamus and una de istas tres personas.'
3
It will be observed that h is
frequently omitted in this MS. at the com-
mencement of a word. This is particularly the case with habere.
* '
For habent.'
5
So the MS. The British Museum MS. Reg. 2. B. v., which reproduces
'
several of these notes, has Quia ipsum nullus mensurare potest.'
6
The quotation is evidently from Jer. xxiii. 24 in the old Latin or Italic
version Nonne caelum et terram ego impleo,' in the Vulgate 'Numquid non
:
'
'
caelum et terram ego impleo ? Sabatier, Bibttorum Sacrorum Latinae ver-
siones, &c., torn. p. 686, edit. Paris, 1751.
ii. Impleo is generally found
iii
quotations of this text by the Fathers implebo seems to be unexampled. :
7
So the MS.
8
So the MS. Metiens was probably the original reading. These cor-
ruptions and errors show
plainly that this is not the autograph copy of the
Commentary, and that the scribe was copying from an earlier MS.
9
For terram, the mark of contraction being omitted.
10 '
Isaiah xl. 1 2 is doubtless quoted. This text in the old Italic is Quis
manu aquam caelum palmo et omnem terram pugillo
'
mensus est et ? in the
Appendix. 533
scriptum Caelum mihi sedis 1 est, terra aiitem scabellum

est :
2 s
pedum eorum Quern tamen non caelum, non terram
. non ,
mare ilium potest capere, quia nisi ille ibi est, et nullum modo
3
constare potuissent. Sequitur. Aeternus Pater, aeternus JFilhts,

aeternus et Spiritus Sanctus. Aeternus dicit, quia semper in
aeternitate est ante omnia secula et in finem seculorum. E 4
tamen non tres aeterni, sed unus aeternus, sicut non tres increati,
nee tres inmensi, sed unus increatus et unus inmensus. Ut hoc

cognoscas, quia secundum illas personas hoc dictum est. Similiter
omnipotens Pater, omnipotens Filius, omnipotens et Spirfais

Sanctus. Quid est omnipotens, nisi quia semper per omnia
potens est ? Et qui potest diabolum vincere, nisi ille solus, quia
fl
adligavit fortem^ id est, diabolo vasa eius diripuit*, quos de

7
potestatem eius eripuit ? Sicut apostolus Paulus dicit Si Deus :
pro nobis, quis contra nos ? Et tamen non tres omnipotentes, sed
"
unus omnipotens. Quare dicit non tres omnipotentes, sed unus :
omnipotens, nisi quia non potest unus plus quam alius, sed tote
9
tres una voluntate? Que non vult Pater, ne Filius ; que non
vult Filius, ne Pater nee Spiritus Sanctus sed una est voluntas :
illorum. Ob hanc causa lo dicitur non tres omnipotentis n sed :

,
'
Vulgate, Quis mensus est pugillo aquas et caelos palmo ponderavit ? Quis
appendit tribus digitis molem terrae?' in St. Augustine, Epist. cxx. 14, Qui
c
'
caelum mensus est palmo et terram pugillo : and other Fathers in quoting it
agree very nearly with him. See Sabatier, . s., p. 580. The ante-Hieronymian
version would seem to have been followed here.
1
For '
sedes.'
2
For '
meorum,' the initial m being omitted inadvertently. The passage
quoted 'is Isaiah Ixvi. I in the old Italic version, 'Caelum mihi thronus et
terra suppedaneum pedum meorum ' in the Vulgate, ' Caelum secies mea,
;
'
terra autem scabellum pedum meorum. in St. Augustine, Epist. ; cxx. 14,
'
Caelum mihi sedes est, terra autem scabellum pedum meorum.'
3
So the MS.
* '
Apparently e for et.'
5
So the MS. The scribe has written quia for qui, being misled evidently by
the following word commencing with the letter a.
6
See St. Matt. xii. 29.
7 '
The mark of contraction over the final e in
potestate indicative of the
'
omission of m
perfectly clear. It has been already noticed that the MS.
is
contains several instances of the same solecism.

8
Rom. viii. 31.
D
For 'nee.'
10
Clearly for
'
causam,' the mark of contraction being omitted probably
ll '
through inadvertence. For omnipotentes.'
534 Appendix.
unus omnipotens. Sequitur. Deus Pater, Deus Filius, Deus
Ita
et Spiritus Sanctus. Ergo Decs colis ? Absit. Quare ergo
tres
dicitur ;
tres Dei, nisi quia secundum illas personas hoc dictum
est ?Quia Pater Deus, Filius Deus, et Spiritus Sanctus Deus.
Et tamen non tres JDii, sed unus est Deus. Quare ? Quia una
est illorum Divinitas, aequalis gloria, quo-aeterna matesfas. Ita
Dominus Pater, Dominus Filius, Dominus et Spiritus Sanctus,
Et tamen non est Dominus,
tres Domini, sed unus
Sicut superius
dixi, ita et Sed tamen querendum est nobis, pro *

istud sic est.
quid Deus dicitur, vel pro quid Dominus, nisi quia aperte datur
intelligi quia Deus dicitur secundum Divinitatem, et Dominus
secundum humanitatem. Aliter adhuc intellegi potest ; quia Deus
2
dicitur ad providendum, et Dominus nominatur ad domi-
nandum 3 Sed, sicut in aevangelio legimus de illo dissipulo
.
Thomas, quando iterum veniens Dominus apparuit, et non

credente discipulo manus et latus ostendit, et ille exclamavit,
Dominus meus Deus meus 4 quid aliud nisi quod Deum con-
et ;
fessus est ante secula et hominem factum in finem seculorum.

Sequitur. Quia sicut singilatim, id est singulariter, unamquamque
personam et Deum et Dominum confiteri Christiana veritate com-
pellimur, hoc est admonemur sive cogimur, ita tres Deos aut tres
Dominos dicere chatolica relegione proibemur. Quid aliut nisi que

detestamur aut vitamur 5 . Pater a nullo est factus nee creatus nee
genitus. Hie aetiam queri potest, quid abet Pater qui

6
no 7 abet
8
Filius, aut quid habet Filius quod non abet Pater, aut quid abet
9
Spiritus Sanctus que nee Pater abit nee Filius? Sic dictum est:
Filius a Patre solo est, non factus, nee creatus, sed genitus :
Spiritus
Sanctus a Patre et Filio, non factus, nee creatus, nee genitus,
sed procedens quo-aeternae sibi : et quo-aequales. Sed tamen
querendum nobis est, quid est quod a Patre genitus
Filius
dicitur, nisi quod Filius Verbum Patris vocatur; sicut lohannis
aevangelista dicit In principio erat Verbum, et Verbum erat apud

:
Deum, et Deus erat Verbum :o ? In principio erat Verbum, dicit,

"
1
So the MS. Here there is an erasure in the MS.
3 '
The initial letter in 'dominandum appears to have been added by a corrector.
4 s
St. John xx. 28. So the MS. probably for vetamur.' ;
'
'
6 7
So the MS. clearly an error for quod.'
;
'
So the MS.
8
The MS. gives an abbreviation q. D
For habet.' '
10
St. Johni. I.
Appendix. 535
hoc est Verbum erat apud JDeum, vides quomodo

Filius; et
declarat ;
et Deus erat
Verbum, quia quando dixit, fadamus
hominem ad hiinaginem et similitudinem nostram *, non dixit, quia
facio ad similitudinem meam, sed faciamus, id est ad Filium et
2
Spiritum Sanctum hoc dictum est Unus ergo Pater, non tres .
Patres ; unus Filius, non tres Filii ; units Spiritus Sanctus, non
tres Spiritus Sancti, Absit, ut a nobis hoc esse credatur, ut de
tres personas unam faciamus. Et in a 3 trinitate nihil prius aut
4
posterius nihil maius au minus, sed tote tres persone quo-aeterne
sibi sunt et quo-aequales, id est in istas tres personas nullus est
minor nullus est minor, sed tote tres persone quo-aeterne sibi sunt,
ita ut per omnia, sicut tarn supra dictum est, et trinitas in unitate
et unitas in trinitate veneranda sit. Qui vult ergo salvus esse, ita
de trinitate sendat. Sed necessarium est, qui vult ad aeternam
salutem pervenire, ut Dominum nostrum Ihesum Christum
verum hominem esse fateatur
B
.
Quia sunt nonnulli, qui eum
fuisse credunt purum hominem in carnem ; sed alii dicunt, quia
4 7
fantassima ;
alia dicunt, qui patrem carnalem abuisset. Sed
non est nobis hoc si
8
credendum. Credamus eum purum
hominem non fuisse, et in carnem animam rationabilem abuisse.
Et sitivit et esurivit et lassavit et iuxta carnis innrmitatem veros
dolores sustinuit. JEst ergo fides recta, ut credamus et cottfiteamur,
Dominus noster Ihesus Christus, Dei Filius, et Deus pariter
quia
et homo est. Quomodo hoc potest esse? Ipse insinuat, cum
9
subiugit Audi quid dicit. Deus est ex siibstantia Patris ante
.
secula genitus, et homo est ex substanda matris nattts in seciilo :

10
perfectus Deus, perfectus homo ex anima radonabile et humana
1
Gen. i, 26.
2
On first chapter of Genesis St. Augustine says
the passage in the Ad :
'
insinuandam scilicet, ut ita dicam, pluralitatem personarum propter Patrem

Filium et Spiritum Sanctum.' De Genesi ad litteram, cap. xix.
*
3
Clearly for hac.'
<
So the MS.
5
So the MS. : a remarkable instance of carelessness on the part of the
copyist.
6
Probably the words 'verum Deum et' have been omitted inadvertently after
'
Christum.' So it would appear from what follows.
7 '
Clearly for quia,' the final letter being omitted, as is often the case in
this MS.
8
Clearly for
'
sic.'
9
So apparently the MS. for
'
sulitingit.'
10
For '
racionabili.'
536 Appendix.
came subsistens. Quid aliut nisi ut eum verum hominem credas
secundum umanitatem 1 ? Sequitur. Et qualis 2 Patri secundum
Divinitatem^ minor Patri secundum humanitatem. Hoc et etiam
3
querendum est, qur Filius iunior esse Patri credatur ? Superius
dictum est, quia Filius aequalis est Patri, id est, secundum suam
Divinitatem. Unde est minor Patri tantum solum ex illam

carnem 4 quam adsupsit 6 .
Quia enim caeli rex terrain nostram
carnis adsumpsit, infirmitatem nostram iam angelica celsitudo ilia
non dispicit. Hinc est, quod ante redemtoris adventum angeli

ab omnibus adorantur et tacent. Johannes vero in apochalipsin
angelum adorare volunt Sed tamen hisdem angelus, ne se
.
debeto adorare, compescit dicens Vide ne feceris, conservus ttms :
sum et fratum 3 tuorum 7 Quia enim naturam nostram quod 3

.
8
caeli rexadsumpsit super se elevata conspiciunt, adorare sibi et
9 10
pertimescunt Sicut tament.
superius dictum est, nihil credas
1
The British Museum MS. Reg. 2. B. v. has this for one of its notes, adding,
no doubt rightly, '
et esse verum Deum secundum divinitatem.'
So the MS. clearly by an error of the copyist for Aeqnalis.'
2
;
'
*
So the MS.
* '
So clearly the MS., which has ilia carne with the mark of contraction
'
over the last letter of each word indicative of the omission of the concluding m.
I have already noticed the occurrence in this MS. of a similar barbarism the
accusative case after the preposition de.
5
Clearly for adsumpsit ; the mark of contraction over the letter
' '
u being
omitted probably through inadvertence. It is inserted in the same word shortly
after.
6
So the MS. The printed text of St. Gregory has
'
voluit.'
7
Rev. xix. 10.
8 '
Clearly for elevatam,' the mark of contraction over the final a being
inadvertently omitted.
' '
9
From ' Sed to pertimescunt is extremely difficult to read in the MS.,
'
the writing having become very faint, and some words all but obliterated. The
whole passage bears an obvious resemblance to the following in St. Gregory
'
the Great, In Evan. Horn, viii :
Quid enim caeli rex terram nostrae carnis
adsumpsit, infirmitatem nostram ilia iam angelica celsitudo non despicit. . . .
Hinc est enim quod Loth et losue angelos adorant, nee tamen adorare pro-
hibentur, lohannes vero in Apocalypsi sua adorare Angelum voluit, sed
tamen idem hunc Angelus, ne se debeat adorare, compescuit dicens Vide ne :
feceris,conservus enim tuns sum et fratrum tuorum. Quid est quod ante
Redemptoris adventum angeli ab hominibus adorantur et tacent, postmodum
vero adorari refugiunt, nisi quod naturam nostram, quam prius despexerant,
postquam super se assumptam conspiciunt, prostratam sibi videre perti-
10
So the MS., probably for ' tamen ut.'
'
mescunt ?
Appendix. 537
Filio minorem esse Patri, nisi solum secundum umanitatem :
quia nee Pater adsumpsit carnem, nee Spiritus Sanctus, nisi

tantum Filius. Ob hanc causa T est minor Patri. Qui, licet Deus
sit et homo, non duo tamen sed unus est Christus. Nondut 2 hoc
credas, quae
3
illic humanitas non sit cum divinitate, sicut
4
ilia
divinitas et ilia humanitas in unum sibi sint. Audi qui 5

dicit :
Nam, sicut anima racionabilis et caro unus est homo, ita Detis et
homo unus est Christus. Nam, sicut homo unus, qui tamen ex
6
duabus substanciis consta ,
ex corpore videlicet et anima, sed
tamen unus homo est, similiter et Christus ex duabus substanciis
8
constat, deitatem et umanitatem 7
. Non oc credendum est, que
9 30
ilia divinitas non adiungit ad ilia humanitatem, quae ilia
10
divinitas sit per se, et ilia humanitas per se ;
non sic, sed ulla
divinitas et ulla umanitas in unum sunt. Sequitur. Unus autem
non conversione adsumpsione umanitatis in
divinitatis in carne, sed
Deo. Una de istas personas, idem vero Christus. Non ideo
conversus est in carnem, ut suam divinitatem perderet in celum
n !
sed adsumpsit carnem, ut Deus esset secundum divinitatem et

Dominus secundum humanitatem. Unus omnino non confusione
substanciae, sed unitatem persone. Id est, non est confusa
:o
substancia Christi, quae abebat cum Patre et Spiritu Sancto, sed
equaliter sibi sunt. Nam sicut anima racionabilis et caro unus est
homo, ita Deus et homo unus est Christus. Qualis Christus, qui
passus est pro salute nostra, descendit ad infernum, resurrexit
1
So the MS., the mark of contraction being omitted.
2
So the MS., apparently for ' non duo ut,' the two first words being repeated
from the verse of the Creed quoted just before. This passage of the Com-
mentary forms one of the notes in the British Museum MS. Reg. 2. B. v.
3
So the MS., probably for 'quia,' the reading of the note in Reg. 2. B. v.
* ' '
Reg. 2. B. v. reads sed ut probably the right reading.

5 '
Probably for quid,' as before.
6
So the MS., clearly for ' constat.'
7
So the MS., the mark of contraction over the final letter in both words
being clear.
8
For 'hoc.'
9
Apparently for
'
adiungitur;' the mark being omitted.
10
So the MS.
'
11
This word may be '
celum or colum,' but '
it is so difficult to read that it
is impossible to say for certain what it is.

13
So the MS., the mark of contraction over the last letter being quite
distinct.
538 Appendix.
a mortuis. Nam querendum est, quum ad ilium latronem, qui
crucem 1 suspensus est, dixit Amen dico tibi, odie mecum en's in
:
2
paradiso et rursum dicunt aevangelia
;
Inclinato capite tradidil :
3
spiritum ;
et hie dicit :
Statym descendit ad inferos ; quomodo
hoc potuit facere ? Num quod divisa fuit anima Christi ? Quid
4
aliut intellegit debet, nisi de illius divinitate, que inseparabilis
est Patri et Spiritu Sancto, hie dictum est : Amen dico tibi, hodie
mecum erit^ in
paradiso anima simplex descendit ad
? Et ilia
inferos, ad alias animas liberandas. Et postquam eas inde

5
liberavit, stim rediit ad corpus suum ;
et in earn carnem, que
*
prius fuerat, resurexit ;
et in aevangelio legimus, quod multa
corpora sanctorum, qui dormierant, resurrexerunt, et venierunt in

sanctam civitatem, et aparuerunt multis 6 Quid hoc voluit .
Christus facere, quod tune corpora sanctorum resurexerunt cum

1110 pariter, nisi quia ut perfeccius crederetur, quae et ipse
7
resurexit in earn carnem, que prius fuerat, qui et alias sicut
resurgere facit? Et, post apparuerunt, redierunt in eorum
sepulcra. Ascendit ad celts 8 ; sedetad dextera 9

Patris. Inde ven-
turus iudicare vivos et mortuos. Vivos dicit qui in came inveniendi
sunt, et mortuos dicit, quorum iam ossa per eorum sepulcra con-
sistunt. Sicut ilia tuba magna fuerit cantura, et vox de celo
audita fuerit dicens Surgite, surgite ;
: omnes mortui et vivi tarn
corpora sua incorruptibiles accipiunt et resurgunt. Sed tamen

10
1111 vivi,
qui tune inventi fuerint, non moriunt sed in eorum ;
locum, ubi unus quisque stat, carnem illam corruptibilem, que

u sed tamen animam suam non
abent, mutata incorruptibilem ,
1
So the MS.
2
St. Luke xxiii.
43. This agrees with the Vulgate, also with the text as
quoted by SS. Hilary and Augustine. The old Italic inserts quod before hodie.
3
St. John xix. 30. This agrees both with the old Italic and the Vulgate.
* '
So the MS., clearly for intelligi.'
1
8 '
Evidently for statim.
6 7 '
St. Matt, xxvii. 52, 53. Possibly se ipsum' is omitted.
8
There are instances of this barbarism in the rubrics of the Utrecht Psalter
'
Canticum Moysi ad filiis Israhel' '.Hymnum ad matutinis.'
9
The mark of contraction over the last letter has doubtless been omitted
inadvertently. ;
10
No doubt the mark of contraction for the termination ur has been omitted
inadvertently.
11
Probably the mark of contraction over the final a in 'mutata' and the
Appendix. 539
exiendo corpus suum. Unde scriptum est : Tarn iustorum, quam

1
iniustorum, caro incorruptibiliter resurgit ttuf penam possit
2 3
suffer rere pro peccatis vel pro in aeterna gloria manere pro
meritis 4
. Ad emus adventum omnes hominis resurgere abent cum
corporibus suis, et reddituri sunt de factis propriis radonem. Et^
5
qui bona aegerunt, ibiint in vitam aeternam, et qui male^ in ignum
aeternum. Unde nos Dominus pro sua pietate eripere dignetur.
Haec est fides catholica, id est universalis. Nam nisi quisque
fideliter et^ firmiterque crediderit^ salvus esse non poterit .
' '
preposition in before incorruptibilem have been omitted inadvertently, so that

1
the text should be ' mutatam in incorruptibilem.
1
So apparently the MS. obviously for ut.'
;
'
2
So apparently the MS. ; clearly for sufferre.' '
3
The copyist evidently intended at first to write ' pro meritis,' but finding
himself in error did not add the latter word and afterwards neglected to erase ;
the former word which he had written by mistake.

*
The commentator is evidently quoting the following passage in the Liber
de dogmaticis Ecclesiasticis commonly, but upon uncertain grounds, attributed
to Gennadius : ' Eadem caro corruptibilis, quae cadit, tam iustorum quam in-
iustorum incorruptibilis resurgit, quae vel poenam sufferre possit pro peccatis
aut in gloria aeterna manere pro meritis.' So the passage is printed in the
Appendix to St. Augustine, Migne, Patrologia Latino., torn. xlii. p. 1215;
but a MS. in Museum
Addit. 12,725, which contains a copy of
the British
' '
that exposition of doctrine, gives some variety of reading caro is inserted :
' ' ' ' '

' ' ' ' '
after iniustorum,' \it is read for quae, penas for penam/ sufficere
for 'sufferre,' 'aut' for 'vel.' It will be observed that some of these readings
are followed by the Commentary. In the B. M. MS. the above-mentioned
document is entitled Doctrina Ecclesiastica, and is not
assigned to any author.
It isremarkable that it does not maintain the view, in support of which it
appears to be here alleged, but rather favours the opinion broached by
St. Augustine, but only as a conjecture, that the quick at Christ's
coming
shall undergo a momentary death. St. Aug. de Civ. Dei, lib. xx. cap. 20.
It asserts however that either opinion may be held without heresy. The
passage quoted, it is obvious, merely maintains the. identity of the risen body ;
the quotation therefore is inapposite.

5
So the MS.
c
The last three words have been rendered illegible by a note written over
them, A.D. 1219.
54 Appendix.
K.
Copy of a Greek Version of the Athanasian Creed from

r?/j a.i7rapdvov Mapias /car' idos rrjs 'Pwjitat/c^s avhijs- 'Euro,
âAjixqi rrjs juerawnas, K.T.A. Printed by Aldus at Venice

A. D. 1497.
'
2u/zj3oA<w roO ay/ou A.0avao-iov.
"Oo~Tis f3ov\t)Tai vmdijvai, trpo TrdvTatv %pr] KpaTelv rf/v Ka6o\iKrjv TTIO~TIV.
Kv tl fir/
els eicaoTOS o~a>av KOI afia/jajrov TTjpT)o~r),
aveu io~Tayp.ov ds TOV
alaiva UTroAetTai. Hiarris fie 9 KatfoAiKi) avTij ecrrlv, "iva eva 6tbv eV rpiddt
Kal rpidfta ev p.ovd8i a-ejB<afji.e6a. Mrjre crvyxfOVTfs ras woaracreiff p.f)Te
TTJV ovcriav p-epiôvres. "A\\r] yap ecrrlv fj

vrroarao'is TOV Trarpos^ a\\rj TOV
vloVj aXKr) TOV ayiov irvev p.aros. 'AAXa Trarpos Kal viov Kal dyiov irvfv-
fiaTOs pia ecrrlv T) Qforrfi, "ivr) r) 86a, crvvaidios f) /aeyaAeiorryr. Oios 6
Trarfjp, TOIOVTOS 6 vlos, TOIOVTOV Ka\ TO ayiov Trvevp.a. "AKTKTTOS 6

'
aKTicrros 6 vlos, aKTurTov KOI TO Ttvevfjia TO ayiov. A.KaTa\r]TrTos 6
aKaTafarjTTTOs 6 vlos, a.Kara\r)TrTov Ka\ TO rrvevfia TO ayiov. Aldivios o irarfjp,
almvios 6 vlos, al<aviov Kal TO Trvfvp.a TO ayiov. Tl^rfV ov Tpels alaivioi, a\A'
els aluvios, "Qo-TTtp oiSe rpeis aKaraA^TTToi owSe Tpeis CIKTIO-TOI, d\\' fls
O.KTICTTOS KOI els a.KaTa\rt irTos. 'O/noicos 7ravTo8vva/j,os 6 TraTrjp, TravTo8v-
vap.os 6 vlos, TravTobvva/jLOV Kal TO irveiiâ TO ayiov. H^TJV ov Tpels TTOVTO-
Svvapoi, d\\' eis jravTo8vvap.os. OVTO> 6ebs 6 TraTTjp, debs 6 vlos, debs Kal
TO TrvevfJta TO ayiov. U\f/v ov Tpeis 6eoi, dAA' eis Qeos. *Ofj.oia>s Kvpios 6
1
TraTrjp, Kvpios o vlos, KVpiov Kai TO jrvevp.a TO ayiov. IlXiji/ ov Tpeis
Kvpioi, dAA' els C'O-TI Kvpios. "Ort a>s I8iav p.iav eKacrTov virdcrTao~iv debv
Kal Kvpiov 6fJ.o\oye1.v Tfl ^pfcrrtaw/c^ a\r]6eiq fiia6p.(6a, OVTO> Tpels deovs rj
Tpeis Kvpiovs \eyfiv Trj KadoXiKtj euo-e/3et'a KcoAuo/iteâ. 'O Trcrnjp OTT'
C
ovSevos eo~Ti TTOIIJTOS oi/'re
p,r)v KTIO~TOS ovSe yevvrjTos. O vlos OTTO TOV
TTOTpOS jUoVoi/ fO~Tll>, OV TTOirjTOS OV KTIO~TOS dXAa yeVl>r)TOS. To TTVfVfia TO
ayiov OTTO TOV jraTpbs Kal TOV viov, ov TroirjTov ov KTICTTOV dAA' eKTTopevTOV.
ovv TraTTjp,
ov Tpels jvarepes, eis vibs ov Tpeis vloi, ev Tvvevp.a ayiov ov
Tpla irvevfjiaTa ayia. Kav TavTr] Ty Tpidbi ovoev irpoTepov r) vo-Tepov, ovdtv
p.(1ov r) eXaTTov, dXXa Q-UUI al Tpeis viroaTaa-eis Kal vvvaidiai el&lv eavTals
Kal 'io~ai. "iJo"Te KaTa Trdvra, KaGcas e'ipijTai, Kal Trjv p.ovdSa ev Tpid8t
crel3eo~6ai 8e1 Kal TTJV TpidSa ev p.ovddi. 'O yovv fiovX6fi.evos o~(o6i]vai OVTCO
eo~Ti Vpo? aicoviav

irep\ Tpid8os (ppoveiTco. IlXr/v dvayKalov o~u)Tr)piav oircas
Kal Tr]v fvaapKoxnv TOV Kvpiov fjp.5>v 'ijjo-ov Xpto-ToO en opdSts

1
Sic.
Appendix. 541
v
Eort yap TTiorts op6r) Iva 7riOTeva>/iei> Kal 6p.o\oya>(j.ev
on 6 itvpios y
iTjffovs Xptoros 6 vibs TOV deov 6fbs Kal avdpamos eari. Qebs eK TJJS
oixrtas TOV irarpbs TT/JO ala>v<av yevvrjdels KOI avdpatrros ex TJJS ovo~ias TTJS
bs ev TW niwi/t re^6fis. TeXeios debs KOI reXeios avBpwnos e/c
'
/u dvdpwirivrjs cropKos ti^>i<rr a/zeros.
I<ros TW irarpi Kara
,
e\oTTa>v TOV irarpbs Kara TTJV avQpatTroTrjTa. "Of, et *al êoj xat
avvpa>iros etrnv, ov 8vo o/icof dXX' eis e'art Xptaros. Ely 8e, ou rponfi rjjs
els crdpKa, aXXa TrpocrXij^ct T^S avdpcairorriTos els 6f6v. Eis
s, ov avyxvcrei rfjs overlay, aXX' evorr]Tt rrjs viroarao'ecoy. Kal ya/),
toy ^v^^ XoyiK) KOI ^ crap^ efs eVrli/ avdpairos, ovrta KOI 6 6edvSpa>Tros eis
earl Xpi(rros. *Os enade 8ia rr]V a-<arr]piav fi/j.>v, KarrfkBcv ev aBov.
'AvecrTt) Ttj 17)1777 ijp-epq. eK T>V veKpS)i>. 'A.vrf\6ev els ovpavovs, Kadrjrai eK
dfi.>v TOV Trarpbs Kal 6eov iravTOKpaTopos. "OBev f}ei Kplvai >VTas Kal
veKpovs. Ov Tfl irapovcriq Travres ol avdpanroi avatTTrjcTovrai p.era rG>v
trcoju.aTcoi' avr&v, Kal drroBcbcrovcriv e ldi<ov epywv rr)V diroXoyiav. Kal

ot /j,fi>
TO dya6a irpdâvres TroptvcrovTai els <ar]V ala>i>ioi>, ol 8e TO. <pav\a els
TO irvp TO alcoviov. A.VTT) effrlv 17 Ka6o\iKTi irioris, TJV eav /z^ TIS 7rt<rTO)S
croodijvat. ov 8vvf)o~eTai.
L.
Copy of a portion of a Greek version of the A thanasian Creed

in Vat. 81, a MS. of the Vatican Library, f. \ 63, r. I have
attempted to reproduce the punctuation and the accent^tation

of the MS. as far as possible as well as the spelling. >
(3ouXat'rat o-oQrjve .
irpo jravrov Kpol. K.paTr)v TOIV K.a66\oiKo\v
Hi) eai/ pat, TJ/VO- TeXHaV afj.6p.ov . bv <^HXaK|oi ava& SoHo-Tay/xoO
HO- eova . OTroXotra?. IIHO-T-HO- Se rj

KuôXHKoi acorot' e&rolv . ivd evd
6v fv rpiadoH , Kal rpiabd. Kc jtiofaSa crau>^6p.atdd MH CTotêoj/reV .
Ta TrpoaoTra .
poire rolv ovcrndv aTTOTaip-vovraicr .
rjTaipoo" yap . eorotV
o^wpa/xToip TOV TrarpoV .

eTalpocr TOV ioHv .
eratpvo- TOV ayiov irva \ AXXa
2 s 4
TraTpoo- Kat tou Ke yHov .
TTvepaTOQ- .
paid e&Tttv rj
&OTHO- rja-ol So^di'
5
o-waHSocoo" .
T) ,
palyaXoorvol . Htoo- cib
TrwTotp . TOIOUTOO" tovo- TOHOUTOI'
6 7 8
Kat TO TTve. r aHov. AKTWIO-TOO- <x>
1
Sic.
2
H is written above t.
3
a is written above 7 to the left.
4
The two last letters seem to have been altered.
c
H is written above ov. 6
a is written above fj, to the right.
7
01 is written above T to the right. 8
H is written above rp.
542 Appendix.
We have here I think ot occurring twelve times for rj accord-
ing to the usual spelling, H eleven times for t, at eight times for e,
o five times for o>, ot four times for i, e four times for at, a> three
times for a, j three times for t,

twice for v, 77 once for e<,
H once
for ei,
aa) once for ev and once for ,
ot once for vy and once for ft,
H once for *,
a> once and once
for o for v, and K once for x- I do
not give this as an exhaustive list of the anomalies and pecu-
liarities in this
excerpt. must not be supposed that we have
It
here a sample from which an estimate may be formed of the

codex generally ; on the contrary, with this exception it appeared
to me to be well and correctly written.
M.
Copy of the earliest English version of the Athanasian Creed
contained in British Museum MS. Addit. I7,376,/. 147 v-
149 v.
*
WHOSO wyll be sauf, nede it is to hym to fore alle thinges
3
that he holde the catholick faithe. The which bot 3if 2 ich on
kepe hole and noujt defouled, wyth outen drede he shal peris
wyth outen ende. The faithe for sothe of holy chirche is this,
4
that we houen o god in trinite and the trinite in onhede, nou:$t
confoundand persons ne departand substaunce. On for sothe is
persone of the fader, another of the sone, another of the holy

gost ; bot of the father and of the sone and of the holy gost is o
godhede, even glorie, majeste to gidres everlastand. Swich as
the fader, swich is the sone, swich is the holi gost. Unfourmed
is the fader, unfourmed is the sone, unfourmed is the holi gost.
Mychel his the fader, mychel his the sone, mychel his the holi
gost. The fader hys everlastend, the son is everlastend, the holy
gost is everlastend. And never the lefse ther ne be nou3t thre

everlastend, at ther on everlastend. As hii 5 ne ben nou3t
is
thre unfourmed, ne thre grete, at on unfourmed, and on grete.

Also his the fader alrm^ti, the sone aln^ti, the holi gost almi3ti.
1
In the MS. p always stands for th.
<
2
3 signifies y at the beginning of a word and gh elsewhere.
3 *
i.e. each one. i.e. one.
6
The pronoun meaning they.
Appendix. 543
And. never the les ther ne ben non thre almijti, hot on is almi3ti.
'So is god fader, god is sone, god ys the holy gost. And na for
than ther ne ben noujt thre goddes, bot ther is o god. So is the
fader lord, the sone lord, the holy gost lord. And na for than
ther ne ben noujt thre lordes, at on is lord. Ffor as we ben
constreint thurj cristen sothenes 2 to knowelich on lich god and
'
lord ich a persone, so we be defended thur3 catholik religion to

seien thre goddes and thre lordes. The fader his made of no
wijt, ne fourmed ne bijeten. The sone is one liche of the fader,
noujt made, nojt formed, at bijeten. The

holy gost is of the
fader and of the sone, noujt made, noujt formed, nojt bijeten,
bot forthgoand. Ffor thi o fader is and nou3t thre fadres, o sone
and noujt on holy gost and nou5t thre holy gost 3
thre sones, .
Bot in this trinite nojt is to fore ne noujt by hinde, noujt more
ne lafse, at alle thre persons ben to gadres everlastand and even.

So that by alle thinges, as it is soue said aboue, and on hede in
thre hede and thre hede in on hede be to houd. Ffor thy he
that wil be saved fele he so of threhede. Bot nedeful thinge is
to the everlastand helthe that he trowe lich bileve the incar-
nacioun of our lord ihesu crist. Ffor thy the rijt bileve is that
we and knowelich that our lord ihesu crist, goddes sone, is
bileve
god and man. He his god of the substaunce of the fader biêten
to fore the worldes and man of the substaunce of the moder
boren in the world. He is perfit god and perfit man, beand of
reasonable soule and mannes flesshe. He is even to the fader
efter the godehede, lafse than the fader efter the manhede. The
which, tho5 he bi god and man, na for than hii ben nou3t two bot
o crist. He is for sothe on nojt thurj taking of manhede in to
god
4
He is on in alle, nou^t thur3 confusion of substaunce,
.
but thur3 onhede of persone. Ffor, as resonable soule and flesshe

is o man, so is god and man o crist. The which suffred for our
helthe, went to helle, and aros the thridde daie from deth to lyf.
He ste3e up to the hevens, sitteth at the ri3t hand of god fader
almi3ti. From thennes he is to cum to jugen the quike and the
3
1
i.e. through. i.e. truth.
3
So the MS.
4
Clearly some words have been omitted after tfuir). The Latin in this MS.
'
is non confusione (sic) divinitatis in carne, sed assumptione humanitatis in
deum.'
544 Appendix.
ded. At whowos cumyng al men ban to rise wyth her bodis and
ben rekening of her propre dedes.
to êlden And hii that deden
wele shal gou to the lif everlastand, and hii that han don ivel
shul gou into fir everlastend. This ys the bileve catholik, the
which bot if ich man have bileved trowlich and fastelich, hene
may noirjt be sauf.
N.
Copy of the Wycliffe version of the A thanasian Creed from

the British Museum MS. Addit. 10,049.
WHO evere wole be saaf, it is nedeful bifore alle thingis that he
holde the comyne bileve. This comune feith is of this kynde 1 ,
that, but if
2
ech man kepe it hool and unfilid, withouten doute
he schal perische withouten ende. This is the comune bileve,
that we worschipe o 3 god in trynite of persones the which god is
trynyte of oonhede of godhede neth medlynge * these thre :
persones, ne departinge the substaunce. There is othir persone

of the fadir and othir of the sone and othir of the hooly goost.
But of these thre persones is oo godhed and evene glqrie and
comyne magiste withouten ende. Which is the fadir, siche is
the sone, and siche is the holy goost. Unmaad is the fadir,
unmaad is the sone, unmaad is the holy goost. The fadir is
withoute mesure myche 5 and eek the sone with the holy goost.
The fadir is withouten bigynnynge and also withouten endynge
and so ben the other two persones. And netheles if god be
such that ther ben not thre goddis suche for there is but o god :
of what kynde manere that he be, and so there ben not thre
unmaad ne thre thus grete ne thre withouten ende, but alle these
thre persones ben o god that is siche. Also almy3ty is the fadir,
almyjty is the sone, almy3ti is the holi goost. And netheless not
1 '
The words This comune feith is
'
of this kynde are not underscored
in the MS. with a red line as the words of the version are in general, but they
are clearly necessary to the sense.
2 3
i.e. except. ; i.e. one.
4
i.
mingling or confounding.
e.
5
The preceding version has mychel, that in Bodleian MS. 425 mikel.
6
i.e. also.
Appendix. 545
thre goddis ben almy^ty, but o god is almy^ty. So the fadir is

god, the sone is god, and the holy goost is the same god. And
netheles ther ben not thre goddis, but o god is alle these thre.
And so the fadir is lord, the sone is lord, and the holy goost is
lord. And }it ther ben not thre lordis, but o lord is ech. of these.
And to this witt speketh the crede
!
,
that we ben nedid 2
to
graunte that ech of these thre persones is ful god and ful lord,
3
and 3it we ben forfendid of god to seie that ther ben thre goddis
or that these thre persones ben thre lordis bi general religioun.
But the fadir is maad of noon ne maad of noujt ne bigeten.
The sone is of the oo fadir, not maad ne maad of noujt but
boren. The holy goost cometh bothe of the fadir and of the
sone, not maad ne maad of noujt
4
but comyng forth. And
5
herfore we moten nede confefse that there is oo fadir not thre
fadris, oo sone not thre sones, oo holi goost not three holi
goostis. And in this trynite is noujt tofore ne aftir more ne
lefse, but alle these thre persones ben evene withoute bigynnyng
and ende and evene in power and in godhed. And so we
gaderen here, as it is before seid, that bothe oonhed in godhed
and trynite in persones and oonhed c to be wor-
trynite in this
schipid over other thingis. And who evere wolde be saaf, thus
fele he of the trynyte. Biside the godhede of these thre persones
it is nedeful to knowe the manhede of this secunde persone and
so trowe it treuli. Therfore it is ri5t bileve that we bileve and

knoweleche that oure lord ihesu crist, goddes sone, is bothe god
and man. He is god of his fadris substaunce born spirituali
before the world, and he is man of his modris substaunce born
and maad man in the world. And so he is perfit god as he was
tofore the world, and he is perfit man maad of a resonable soule
and is of mannes fleisch. And so evene to the fader bi his
godhede and lefse than the fadir bi his manhede. But if crist
be god and man and so two kyndis 7 and bothe of him 8 netheles ,
crist is not two persones but oo. Crist is oo persone, not bi turnyng
1
The words And '
to this witt speketh the crede
'
are not underscored.
2 ' '
After nedid Harleian MS. 1806 and Laud 448 read by '
christen trouthe.'
:l * '
i.e. forbidden. Bodleian 288 adds ne bigeten.'
5
The words 'And herfore . . . confesse' are not underscored.
'
' T
be is added in Bodleian 288. i.e. natures.
8 '
Bodleian 288 also reads him,' but Laud 448 '
hem.'
N n
546 Appendix.
of god in to fleisch, but bi takynge of manhede into godhede.
And thus crist is algatis * oo, not bi confusioun of his substaunce,
but by oonhed of his persone 2 For with 8 a resonable soule
.
and fleisch is bothe o man, so in crist bothe god and man is

o persone in That crist suffride for oure helthe, wente
crist.
doun and thridde 4 day roos from deth. And thus

into helle,
5
crist steje to hevenes, sittith on the ristside of the fadir almy3ty,
and fro thennis he is to come to deme the quike and the dede.
Hereso B this comynge at the laste day shal al manere of men rise
and shal give resoun to crist of her owne dedis. And these men
7
that hav do goode dedis schulen go to luf withouten ende, and
these men that hav do yvelis schulen go to fier withouten ende.
This is general bileve, the which but 8 ech man trowe truli and
9
stedfastli, he may not here be saaf.
1
i.e. wholly.
2
This and the preceding verse are not underscored with red in the MS. as
the version is in general. The omission was no doubt through inadvertence.
s
Bodleian 288 and Laud 448 both have for whi as.' '
4 5
Laud 448 reads '
on the thridde.' i.e. ascended.
c
So apparently this MS. ; others read to.' '
7 '
So apparently; other MSS. have 'lyf and 'lif?
8 9 '
Bodleian 288 adds 'if,' Other MSS. add with.'
GENERAL INDEX.
-M-
Abbo of Fleury, 28 ; his evidence of commentary on Quicunque, 248 ;
the use of the Quicunque in Eng- ascribes it to Anastasius, 249 ;
land, ibid. method of, ibid. ; passages wrongly

Abelard, quotes Quicunque, 36; his ascribed to St. Augustine, 250 ;
commentary on, 236 dependence ;

MSS. containing it, ibid.
on earlier expositions, 237; letter Amalarius, work of, on the Offices of
to Bernard of Clairvaux respecting the Church, 444, 454.
Cistercian Breviary, 453. Ambrosian rite, peculiarities of, 446 ;
Adalbertus, Bp. of Morinum, his pro- its Canticles, 149, 151 ; daily use of
fession of faith, 26. Quicimque, 428.
Admonitio Synodalis, 80, 81, 193, 194, Anastasius, Pope, Qtiicunque ascribed
426. to, 239, 249, 399 ff.
Adoptionist controversy, its bear- Angers collection of Canons, 53 ff.

ing on the date of the Fortunatus Anglo-Saxon Church, its use of Qui-
Commentary, 170, 171 ;
of the cunque, 29, 140 ff., 450.
Quicunque, 208-213. Anglo-Saxon Homilies of Êlfric, 29 ;
Adrian, Pope, 113. quotations from Quiczmqtie, 29,

yElfric, Abp. of Canterbury, 31 ff. ; 30; their authorship, 31-33.
Abp. of York, ibid. the monk, ibid.
; Anglo-Saxon glosses in Psalters,
.^neas, Bp. of Paris, quotes Quiciinqm 141 ff., 304.
as Athanasian, 26. Anselm, Dean of Laon, compiler of
.ffithelstan, Psalter of, I25ff., 337, 'glosa scolastica,' 244.
449- Antioch, John of, 356, 361.
Agobard, Bp. of Lyons, quotes Qui- Antiphonary of Bangor, 14. a^f 1 3
cunque as Athanasian, 19. Apollinarian controversy, 362, 365,
Aix-la-Chapelle, Convention of, 67. 366.
Alcuin's Libellus de Processions Apostles' Creed, sermons on, 3-12.
Spiritus, 16 ; quotes Qiiicunque as Aquinas, Thomas, his defence of the
Athanasian, 17 ; authenticity and use of Creeds, 41 his explanation ;
date, ibid. Defide S. Trinitatis

;
his of the Ephesine Canon krkpa. marts,
and Monotheletism, 186, 189. 42 ; attributes Quicunqne to Atha-
Aldus press editions of the Horae, nasius, ibid.
281-283, 311. Arian hypothesis of the Trinity illus-
Alexander de Hales, 40 ;
his reasons trated by metals, 226 derived from ;
for liturgical use of creeds, ibid.; St. Augustine, 215.

Nn
548 General Index.
Armenian Church receives Quicunque, mentary, ibid. ; list of MSS. con-

458. taining it, 197.
Arnold, Abbot of Lubeck, 37. Bremen, Church of, and Vienna
Athanasius not the author of the Psalter, 104 ff.
Quicunque, 335 ; earliest ascription Breviary, oldest extant MS. of, 164 ;
to him, 395 ;
how accounted for, inclusion of Qutcunyue, 423 ;
402 ff. modern Cluniac omits Quictmqzie,

Atto, Bp. of Vercellae, his Capitulare 433 when inserted in Roman, 452.
j
and the Epistola Canonica, 48. Bruno, Bp. of Warzburg, his Psalter,
Augustine, Bp. of Hippo, his chrono- 226 compared with Stavelot Com-
;
logy, 172; connexion with Oratorian mentary, 205-208 MSS. copies of, ;
Commentary, 189 language com-

; 227-230 Waterland's mistakes
;
pared with Treves fragment, 6-8 ; respecting it, 229, 239 ; printed
with Quicunque, 347 with the ; editions, 231.
Commonitoriiim of Vincent of
Lerins, 378, 385. Caesarius of Aries, sermon of, refer-
Autun, Canon of, 52 ;
its evidence of ring to Quicimque, 4, 347.
use of Quicunque as Athanasian in Calecas, Manuel, quotes Greek ver-
seventh cent, 53, 346 ; enlarged sion of Quicunque, 291.
knowledge of it by publication of Calendar, English, and chronological
Angers and Herovall collections, 53, rules in tenth cent., 127-129, 158.
54; their date, 55 ;

contents of the Caspari's Greek versions QiQuicunqtte,
Angers collection,
55-58 of the ; 295-300.
Herovall collection, 58-60; their Cassian, his treatise on the Incarna-
evidence of genuineness and anti- tion, 356, 373 introduces Prime in
;
quity of the Canon, 60-62 history ;

the West, 425.
of MS. 1603, Paris, Lat, 62, 63 ;
Catholica Fides, earliest title of the
meaning of Fides S. Athanasii in Quicunque, 2, 3, 392.

Autun Canon, 63-65 date of Leo- ; Chalcedon, definition of, its bearing
degar's Synod, 65, 66. on date of Quicunque, 364.
Avitns, Bp. of Vicnne, defends doctrine Charlemagne, treatise of Alcuin dedi-
of Double Procession by quoting cated to, 17 ;
his convention at
language of Quicunque, 2. Aix-la-Chapelle, 67 ; Psalters of
his time, 72, 98, 107, 448; date
Bamberg Psalter, 138-140. of his reign, 115 ;
his patronage of
Beleth, John, rector of the Theological literature, 193.

School of Paris, 38 reckons four ;
Charles the Bald, capitula of, 76 ;
Creeds, ibid. his relations with Pope Hadrian,

Benedictine use of Quicunque in 102 ff.
monastic offices, 20, 21,

432. Chiliasts, 174.
Bessarion, Bp. of Tusculum, advocates Christendom, relation of Eastern and
Western doctrine of the Procession Western, in fifth cent., 373.
at Council of Florence, 277. Chronology, ofEusebius, 115, 172 ; of
Bohemian version of Quicunque, Fortnnatus's Commentary, 171 ;
of
332. Augustine, 173.
Bonnier Commentary on Qtiicunqne, Church estates, alienation ""of, by
195 ;
relation to Oratorian Com- clergy forbidden, 48, 49.
General Index. 549
Cirencester, Abbey of, 244. English Synodalia referring to Qm-

Cluniac monks, rule of daily recitation cunqiie, 89 ff. Constitutions of
;
of Quicunque, 27; modern Breviary Walter de Cantilupe, Bp. of Wor-

omits Quicimque, 433, cester, 89 ;
of Walter de Kirkham,
Colbertine MS. of Quictmque, wrongly Bp. of Durham, 90 ;
of Peter Quivil,
so described, 8. Bp. of Exeter, 91.
Commonitoritim of Vincent of Lerins, versions of Quicunque, 304-320, 450.
coincidences with Quicunque, 348, use of French versions of Qui-
358, 3<5o, 374, 378 ff.J and with cunque, 326.
writings of Augustine, 378, 385. Epistola Canonica, 47 reasons given;
by the Ballerini for supposed refer-

Dagulfus the scribe, dedicatory verses
ence to Quicunque, ibid. ; external
of, 104. evidence of antiquity, 48 internal
;
Damasi symbolum, 15.

evidence of authenticity, 49 ; list of
Date of the Quicunque, 336 ff. sum- ;
codices containing it, 50-52 its ;
mary of external evidence, 336-

bearing on the date of the Qiii-
347 ; internal evidence, 347-374.
cunque, 346.
Denebert, Bp. of Worcester, his use
Eusebian chronology, 115, 172.
of Quicunque, 15, 16.
Eusebius of Vercellae, 34.
Descent into hell, when first found in
Eutychianism, no trace in Qui-
Apostles' Creed, u ; variations of
of,
its
cunque, 352, 365.
terminology, 13, 14, 222, 368 ;
Exeter, supposed abbey at, 245.

use against Apollinarianism, 369.
Destruction of ancient MSS., 341.
Felix of Orgel, 1 8 V
Dionysius Carthusianus of Ryckel, loq .
Fides Romanorum, 14, 15, 65.
Commentary of, 265.
Fleury, monastery of, 19 daily reci- ;
Discipline, ecclesiastical, 80, 84, 86.

tation of Quicunque at Prime in
Double procession of the Holy Spirit,
ninth century, 19, 20, 432 Abbo ;
2, 147, 170, 188, 209, 409 its ;
Floriacensis, 28; Theodnlf, J8.

treatment in Greek versions of Qui-
Floras the Deacon, letter of, to
cunque, 271, 274, 275, 277, 278,
Hyldrad, 21 ; his revision of the
287, 290, 291, 294, 297, 298, 299,
Psalter, 22; testimony to the use of
300, 301.
the Quicunqzte, 23, 337.
Durandus, Bp. of Mende, Rationale
Fortunatus Venantius, Bp. of Poictiers,
,45- 1 66 his Commentary on the Qui-
;
Eastern Church, attitude of, to Qiti- cunque, 167; uncertainty of author-

cunque, 457. ship, 168 ; date of, 169 ff., 346 ;
Edward VI, first Prayer Book of, 310 ;
its chronology, 171 relation to ;
itsversion of the Quicimque, ibid. ;

Monothelete controversy, i74ff. ;
sources of the version, 311 ff.; rubrics manuscripts of, 176 ff. ;
first printed
relating to Quicunque, 430. copy, 183.
second Prayer Book of, why it en- Frankfort, Council of, 67, 71.
joined increased recital of Quicun- French Psalters, 134, 135 some writ- ;
ten and used in England, 326

que, 430.
English Psalters of tenth cent, con- English saints therein, 327.
taining Quicunque, 140; of eleventh French versions of the Quicunque,
cent, J53ff. 322 ff.
550 General Index.
Gallican collection of Canons, 113, Quicunque as Athanasian, ibid. ;
131- capitula of, 322, 323.

German versions of Quicunque, 320- Honorius of Autun, 35, 427 ; explains
322. use of four Creeds, 35.
Germany, early reception and use of Horologies, Greek, 300 ff.
the Quicunque in, 447. Hypostatic union in Quicunque, 35 2 .
Glosa scolastica, 243.

Godescal's Book of the Gospels, 104. Incomprehensibilis, how used in Qui-
Greek books of devotions used by cunque, 313.

Inquisitio Synodalis, So, 193, 194.
Latins, 285, 286.
Irish Church, connexion with Gaul
horologies, 300 ff.
and Lerins, 389 ; early reception of
Psalter containing Quicunque, 2%^;
the Quicunque, 451.
its influence on the
English Prayer Irish MSS. of the Quicunque, 33, 93 ;
Book version, 286 ;
Graeco-Latin
curious tradition of its authorship,
Psalter, 296.
33-
versions of the Quicunque, 270 ;
Italian version of Qtticunque, 332.
four edited by Montfaucon, 270-295 ;
two by Caspari, 295-300 one ; Jacobus Perez de Valentia, his Com-

appended to a Greek horology, mentary on the Quicunque, 267.
300. Jerome, St., controversy with Rufinus
on the Resurrection of the body,
Hadrian, Pope, and Charlemagne, 372 note.
102. Johannes Genuensis, his Catholicon,
Hampole Psalter, 250; relation to 42 explanation of the use of Creeds,
;
Canonici MS., 251 ; mistaken 43 Commentary erroneously attri-

;
identification by Waterland with buted to him, 253 his statement ;
Magdalen College MS., 252; his as to the frequency of recitation of
prologue to the Psalter, 255 ; , Quicunqtie, 427.

connexion with Wycliffite version of JUû^ 13^. >7&, J&ff yjfty..'
Leo's Epistle to Flavian, 353, 365.

the Quicunque, and Commentary,
Leodegar, or Leger, Bp. of Autun,
255 ff.; why incomplete, 256. date of his Diocesan Synod,
55 ff. ;
Hatto, Bp. of Basel, Capitulare of,

65, 66.
72-
Litanies, indicating date and locality
Henry, Abbot of Brunswick, quotes of MSS., 109, 134, 136, 143, 144,
Quicunque against the Greeks, 37. J
54> J 57. !59; l6o > J 62, 163, 202,
Heriveus, the writer of Boulogne MS.
228, 327, 341.
20, 226.
Lothair, Emperor, 73 ; capitula of
Herovall collection of Canons, 53 ff.
his reign, ibid, ;
their date and
Hilary of Aries, his supposed author-
74 dependence on earlier
locality, ;
ship of the Quicunqtie discussed,

documents, 75 Psalter of, 119-122.
;
375-377.
Ludolphus Saxo of Strasburg, 46.
Hildegardis, Abbess of St. Rupert,
Luithard, the writer of the Psalter of
104 ; discourse on the Quicunqiie, Charles the Bald, 134.
237-
Hilsey, Bp., Primer of, containing Married clergy in Middle Ages, 49, 88.
Quicunque, 309. Mary, Blessed Virgin, not exempt from
Hincmar, Abp. of Rheims, 24 ; quotes original sin, 241.
General Index. 55 1
Mauritius de Soliaco, Bp. of Paris, 224. Oratorian Commentary on Q^^^cunq^ê,

Merton College Psalter, 238 its ;
its sources, 188.; repudiation of
sources, 239; ascribed to Auastasius, Monotheletism, 189 : MSS. of, 190 ;
ibid. ; position of the Quicimque, date, 192 ff.
ibid. ; wrongly ascribed to Bruno Ordo ad visitandum infirmum (Sarum),

by Waterland, ibid. ;
owners of the 92.
MS., 240. Orleans Commentary on Quictmqtie,
Milan Commentary on the Quicunque, 211 was it the work of Theodulf,
;
221; its catechetical form, ibid. ; 212, 213; relation to earlier Com-
connexion with the Ambrosian rite, mentaries, 214-217.
222; other MSS. of, 223, .224; cf. Otto, Bp. of Freisingen, 37.
233 #
Paris Commentary on Quicunque,
Milanese Psalter, 148.
ff.
199; its date, 200.
Millenary, sixth, 171
Paulinns.of Aquileia, 209.
Monothelete controversy in relation to
Pa.ululus, Robert, of Amiens, 38.
date of Fortunatus's Commentary,
Peckham's Constitutions, 92.
I74ff. ; Troyes Commentary, 186;
Petrus de Qsoma, Canon of Sala-
Oratorian Commentary, 189.
manca, Commentary of, on Qui-
Montfaucon's four Greek versions of
cunque, 265 ;
its account of the
the Quicttnque, 293 fT.
composition and use thereof, 266.
Plusiadenus, Johannes, his dialogue
Nativities, two, of our Lord, 354 .ff.,
supporting Council of
Florence,
380.
290, 291 ;
use of Greek version of
Necham, Alexander, Abbot of Ciren-
Quicunqtie, ibid.
cester, 241 Commentary on Qui-
;
of Quicunque,
Prayer-book version
cunque, 242 ff. ; quotations from
earlier ibid.
311 comparison with Greek, Latin,
;
expositions, ; O.udin's
and other English versions, 312-318 ;
account of the author, 245.
conclusions as to its sources, 318 ff.
Nequam, Alexander, Commentary on Procession of the Holy Spirit, treatises
Quicunque, 246 ; confusion with
his connexion with
by Alcuin, 16; Theodulf, 18 ;
Necham, 247 ;
Ratramn, 25 ; ./Eneas, Bp. of Paris,
Exeter, 248. 26 ; argument at Constantinople by
Nestorian controversy, traces of, in
Henry, Abbot of Brunswick, 37 ;
Qm'cungue, 350 as to unity of

ff. ;
Synod of Nymphaea, 39 discussed ;
Christ, 350 ; analogy of soul .and at Council of Gentili, 171.

flesh in man, 351 hypostatic union,
;
Proclus, Bp. of Cyzicus, 357, 358.
352 ; implied acknowledgement .of
Psalters, contents of, in ninth cent.,
two natures, 353 two nativities of
;
22 ;
earliest extant containing Qui-
our Lord, 354-358 absence of ;
cunque, 98 ; Gallican and Roman
Theotokos explained, 358 dis- ;
Psalters compared, loo, 107 both ;
cussion of the phrase 'perfectus

in use in England in Saxon times,
Deus, perfectus homo,' 360 ;
ff.
144 ; sacramental efficacy attached
repudiation of change in the Divine to recitation of Psalter, 1 63.
substance, 366; the descent into
hell, 369. Quicunqtie, authorship of, 374 39 1 ;
Nice, Council of, composition of Qui- three conditions required, 374 ;
cunqtte attributed to, 33. Waterland's arguments for Hilary of

552 General Index.
Aries examined, 376 no evidence ; cent., 424; its connexion with

for Cassian or Marius Mercator, Prime, 425; reasons for, 40, 43;
378; Vincent of Lerins the only frequency of recital, by secular
person who fulfils the pre-requisite clergy, 425 ; post-Reformation use
conditions, 379 ; parallels between in England, 429 ; monastic use,
hislanguage and that of Augustine, 432 ff., 19, 21, 26, 27, 28, 37, 38, 40.
378 connexion between the Com-
; Quicunqite, Manuscript copies of,
monitorium and the Quicunque, 93 ff. See also special index.
380 ; Augustine the common source Text of, 407 ff.
of both, 385 unity of fundamental
;
Titles of: no title in earliest MSS.,
principle between the Commoni- 392 ;

Fides Catholica, earliest and
torium and Quicunque, 387 early ; most frequent title, 392, 395 ;
when
history of the Quicunque favours attributed to Athanasius, 395 ;
when
this conclusion, 389 summary, 390 ; ;
first called Symbolum, 397 ;
other
why attributed to Athanasius, 402. titles, 398 ; ascription to Anastasius,
Quicunque, Canons and Ecclesiastical 399 titles in English Prayer Book,
;
Injunctions relating to, 47 ff. 401 bearing of titles on its history,

;
Commentaries on, 166 ff. ibid. how the ascription to Atha-

Condemnatory clauses of, sub- nasins is to be accounted for, 402 ff.
stantially found in Vincent of Unity of, 348, 349, 368, 407.

Lerins, 388. Versions of, Greek (7), 270;
Is it a creed, 420 ff.
English (6), 304; German (5), 320 ;
Date of, 336 ff. ; summary of ex- French (5), 322; Spanish (2), 330;
ternal evidence, 336-347 ; internal Italian (i), 332 ;
Bohemian (i),
evidence, 347-374; its resemblance ibid. ; existence of, a proof of
to the language of Augustine, 347, popular use, 438.
348 and to the Commonitoriuni of
; Quivil, Peter, Bp. of Exeter, Con-
Vincent of Lerins, 348 traces of ;
stitutions of, 90.
the Nestorian controversy in its
terminology, 350 ff. the unity of ; Ratherius, Bp. of Verona, quotes
Christ, 350 ;
the analogy of soul Qu^c^mq^le, 27 ; enjoins its recitation
and body in man, 351 the hypo- ; on his clergy, 28 synodica of, 85 ; ;
contumacy and violence of his

'
static union, the phrase licet
352 ;
Deus sit et homo,' 353; the two clergy, 86, 88 ;

his personal un-
'
nativities of our Lord, 354 ;
Per- popularity, 87 ; vicissitudes of his
fectus Dens, perfectus homo,' &c., life, 88.
Unus autem, non conversione Ratramn, monk of Corbie, 25 quotes
'
360 ; ;
Divinitatis in carnem,' &c., 365 ; Quicunque as Athanasian, ibid.

discussion of last verses, 368. Recitation of Psalter in Middle Ages,
History of its reception, in France, 195 ;
sacramental efficacy attached
440; Italy, 444; Germany, 447; to, 163.
England, 450; Ireland, 451; Central Regino, Abbot of Prum, 49, 71, 77;
Italy and Rome, ibid. Spain, 456 ; ;
Admonitio synodalis appended to
never received in Eastern churches, his books on Ecclesiastical Disci-
457 except Armenian, 458.

;
pline, 79, 82.
Language, original, of, 334 ff. Resurrection of the body, meaning
Liturgical use of :
general in ninth of, in Quictmque, 371 ;
controversy
General Index. 553
between Jerome and Rufinus, 371, cunque, 6 ;

views of Drs. Swainson
372 note. and Lumby, ibid. ; arguments for
Riculfus, Bp. of Soissons, 77; statutes priority of Quicunque, 6, 7> 8 ;
of, 194. wrongly called the Colbertine MS.

Rolle, Richard, see Hampole. of the Athanasian Creed, 8 reasons ;
Rufinus on Apostles' Creed, 168; for believing it to be part of a sermon
controversy with Jerome, 372. to catechumens on the Quicunque,
9; its date, 10, n; its bearing on

Schoolmen, attitude of, to the three
the date of the Quicunque, 343.
Creeds, 45.
Troyes Commentary on Quicunque,
Service-books, scarcity of, described where found, 184 relation to Com-
;
in preface to the Oratorian Com-
mentary of Fortunatus, 185 ;
of
mentary, 192, 193, 194.
Theodulf, ibid.\ its date, 186, 187;
Sigeric, Abp. of Canterbury, 31 ff.
repudiation of Monotheletism and
Simon of Tournay, Commentary of,
Origenism, ibid.
240 ascribes Qtiictmque to Pope
;
Anastasius, 241 ; reference to B. V. Unity of Christ's person, 350, 352, 414.

Utrecht Psalter, 122; its date, 123;
Marj', ibid.
Six ages of the world, 173 ff. history of the MS., 124. 3-
<?**-.
Spanish Book of Hours containing Veccus, Patriarch of Constantinople,

Quicunque, 330. quotes Quicunque from Greek ver-
Stavelot Commentary on
Qtticunqtie, sion, 292.
201 MSS. containing it, 202-205
; ; Versions of Quicunque, Greek (7),
relation to Bruno's Psalter, 205-
270-300; English 304-320;
(6),
208 date and authorship, 208-21 1. German
;
(5), 320-322; French (5),
Theodore of Mopsuestia, his profession 322-330; Spanish (2), 330, 331;
of
Italian (i), 332 Bohemian (i),
;
faith, 363, 364.
ibid. existence of a proof of popu-
Theodoret's language about the In- ;
lar use, 438.

carnation, 354, 359.
Vincent of Lerins, probably author of
Theodulf, Abbot of Fleury and Bp.
ff.
of Orleans, quotes Quictmqne, as Qnicttngue, 379
Athanasian, 18; probably author of Walter de Cantilupe, Bp. of Worcester*

Stavelot Commentary, 210; rather Constitutions of, 89.
than that of Orleans Commentary, Walter de Kirkham, Bp. of Durham,
212, 213. Constitutions of, 90.
Theotokos, why not found in Qm- Winchester Psalter, containing names
cimqite, 358. of local saints, 158 connexion of St.
;
Toledo, third Council of, 117. Nicholas with the Cathedral, 160 ;
fourth Council of, 1 2 its confession ;

Latin-French Psalters written in
of faith, ibid. ;
its close relation to the monastery of St. Swithin, 327.
Qiticunqtte, 1 2 ff. ;
its peculiarities, Wycliffite versions of and Commentary
ibid. ; other sources of its language, on the Quicunque, 253 ;
Psalters
14. containing it, 254, 261, 262; their

Traditio Symboli, sermons at, 3-12, arrangements, 265 ; connexion with
117,436. Hampole's Psalter, 255 ff. provision ;
Treves fragment, described and date of manuals in vernacular, 26 r;

discussed, 4; its relation to Qui- characteristic passages, 263-265.
INDEX OF MANUSCRIPTS
CLASSIFIED ACCORDING TO CONTENTS AND LOCALITY.
I. MSS. CONTAINING THE ATHANASIAN CREED.

ENGLAND.
-
-
Brit. Mus. Cotton MS. Galba A. xviii.
Bib. Reg. 2. B. V. .
,, .....
Psalter (of Êthelstan)
.....
.
.125
PAGE
140
Arundel MS. 60
Bodl. MS. Canonici Patr. Lat. 88
.
. .....
.....
158
161
Camb. Univ. Lib. Ff. I, 23
Parker Lib. C.C.C. Camb. 272. O.
cccxci
.
5 .
.
,,
..... 153
135 4- //
^ ____ _~ _ __ _
Lambeth 427
Salisb. Cath. Lib.
In private hands
.
....
.
No. 150
. .
.
.
.
T,
.....
Psalter (of Lothair)
. .
.
.
.
i
.118
142
143
ITALY.
Vat. ....
.....
MS. Pal. 574 Coll.
.....
Canons .
131, 344, 366, 389,
Vat.
-- MS. 82
Milan O. 212
84 .....,,
.....
Psalter
.....
Coll. Conf. Faith .
L$f
151
93, 341, 389
FRANCE.
-
-
Paris B. N. Lat. 13159
- 38486.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Psalter
Coll.
.
Canons
.
.
.
.
.
.
72, 107
3,117
-
-
-
4858
1451
1152 .
.
.
.
.
.
.
Fragment
Coll. Canons ....
.
Psalter (of Charles the Bald)

Coll. Conf. F. .
.
.
.
134
.112
131
2076
Paris Cod. Mazarin 364
2341
... . .
.....
.
14, 133, 145
14, 133, 148
. . . Breviary 164
MSS. Index. 555
AUSTRIA.
PAGE
Vienna Imp. Lib. 28 (Denis) . . Psalter 98
269 . . . . Coll. Conf. F. 133
GERMANY.
Bamberg, no press mark . . . Psalter 138
HOLLAND.
Utrecht Lib. . Psalter 122
II. MSS. CONTAINING QUOTATIONS FROM THE

ATHANASIAN CREED.
Paris B. N. Lat. 3848 B. . Sermons 3, 347
2123 Jj 3, 347
3836 JJ 5, n } i33, 342
III. MSS. CONTAINING COMMENTARIES ON THE

ATHANASIAN CREED.
(Where a commentary is not named the sources cannot be traced.)
ENGLAND.
Bodl. Lib. L. Jun. 25 Fortunatus 176
Laud, Codd. Miscel. 234 178
Lat. 17 . Stavelot . 202
Canonici Bibl. 30
MS. Laud, Misc. 40 (from Stavelot and Oratorian) 218, 219
Codd. Lat. 105 223-4, 234

. .
Rawlinson B. N. 163 . Bruno .
227
Laud, Lat. 96 .
227
284 . Necham 3,4
Auct. D. 2. 9 .
241
.
MS. Rawlinson C. 67 Nequam 246

MS. Laud, Misc. 493 . Hales 248
,,
12 Codd. Misc. ,
250
288 .
877 .
Wycliffite
95
Laud, Misc. 448 . 1
Douce 258 2
59
Laud, Misc. 174 . 262
Brit. Museum MS. Addit. 10046 261, 263
Reg. 8 B. xiv .
(partly from Stavelot) 234
556 MSS. Index.
MSS. Index. 557
Munich
-
Lib. Cod. Lat. 3729
14508
. Fortunatus
,
.
.
.
.
. .181
.
.
PAGE
181
181
Metz Pub. Lib. No. 14 .
(from Stavelot and Oratorian) . 220
AUSTRIA.
Vienna Imp. Lib. 269 (Denis) . . Fortunatus . . .
133,178
SWITZERLAND.
Basle MS. B. IX. 6 .... Simon of Tournay . . .
240
BELGIUM.
Brussels Lib. No. 9191 . . .
(from Stavelot and Oratorian) . 220
IV. MSS. CONTAINING VERSIONS OF THE ATHANASIAN

CREED.
ENGLAND.
Bodl. Lib. Canonici Gr. 116 . . Greek . 280
21 f.
147 b . .
295
Bcdl. Lib. MS. 425 F. 69. v . .
English .
304
MS. 288 39
Brit. M. Addit. 17376 305
10046 309
Brit. M. Harleian 4327 . . . French .
324
.
328
1770 .
328
Camb. Univ. Lib. Ee. i. 10 . .
English . .
309
FRANCE.
Paris B. N. Gr. 1286 (formerly Reg. Greek 272
2962)
Paris B. N. Suppl. Franc. 5145 . . French 329
Paris Royal Lib. 1327 (formerly 2502) Greek
ITALY.
Vat. MS. Gr. Palat. 364 . . Greek 271
81 . .
296
Florence Lib. Plut. xi. cod. 12 .
289
S. Mk. Lib, Venice Cod. DLXXV 295
558 MSS. Index.
AUSTRIA.
PAGE
Gr.
-
Vienna Imp. Lib. (Nessel) Codex CXG.
-
MSS.
- D. I. 79, f.
CCXLV.
229 .
Greek
German
277
297
321
Denis No. xxxvm .
321
GERMANY.
Wolfenbiittel
-
Munich MSS. Germ. 588
589
MS. Theol. xxvn.
f-
.
153
.
f.
.
153
German 321
3 21
321
V. MSS. CONTAINING CANONS AND ECCLESIASTICAL

INJUNCTIONS REFERRING TO THE USE OF THE
ATHANASIAN CREED.
ENGLAND.
Brit. Mus. MS. Addit. 19725 . .
Cap. Lothair 73
ITALY.
Vat. 1342 .
Ep. Canonica 50
1343 50
50
545 5
4332 Cap. Atto .. 85
Vallicellan 5 A Ep. Canonica .. 50
Barberini 2888 .. 50
Vercelli 175 Coll. Canons (Herovall) 54
Ivrea MS. .
54
FRANCE.
Paris B.
-
-
N. Lat. 1
3848
603
B
.
..
. . Coll.
Coll.
Canons (Angers)
Canons (Herovall)
53
54
-
~
2123 54
..
--
'.
4281
2400
Sangerm. 1363.
.. 54
54
54
BELGIUM.
Brussels Burgund. Lib. 10127-10144 . Coll. Canons (Angers) 54
MSS. Index. 559
GERMANY.
PAG IS
Darmstadt 2179 . Coll.Canons (Angers) 53
Munich G in .
Cap. examinations .
SWITZERLAND.
Einsiedeln 205 . . Coll. Canons (Angers) 54
San Gall 675 . . Coll. Canons (Angers) 54
AUSTRIA.
Vienna 2171 . Coll. Canons (Angers) 54
THE END.
SELECT LIST
OF
Stanbarb
PRINTED AT
THE CLARENDON
-
THE HOLY SCRIPTURES, ETC.
M
PRESS, OXFORD.
.
page i
FATHERS OF THE CHURCH, ETC. 4

ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY, ETC. . 5
ENGLISH THEOLOGY 6
LITURGIOLOGY
1. THE HOLY SCRIPTURES, ETC.

HEBREW, etc. Notes on the Aramaic, based on the Thesaurus
Text of the Book of Genesis. By and Lexicon of Qesenius, by Francis
G-. J. Spurrell, M. A. Second Edition. Brown, D.D., S. E. Driver, D.D.,
Crown 8vo. 128. 6d. and C. A. Briggs, D.D.
Parts I V. Small 4to. 2s. 6d.
Notes on
the Hebrew each. Part VI, In the Press.
Text of the Books of Samuel By S. R.
Driver, D.D. 8vo. 145. HEBREW, etc. Hebrew Ac-
centuation of Psalms, Proverbs, and Job.
Treatise on the use of
By William Wickes, D.D. 8vo. 53.
the Tenses in Hebrew. By S. E. Driver,
D.D. Third Edition. Crown 8vo. Hebrew Prose Accentu-
75. 6d.
ation. By the same Atithor. 8vo.
i os. 6 d.
The Psalms in Hebrew
without points. Stiff covers, as.
The Boole of Hebrew
Roots, by Abu '1-Walid Marwan ibn
A Commentary on the
Janah, Eabbi
otherwise called
Book of Proverbs. Attributed to Abra- Y6nah. Now with an
first edited,
ham Ibn Ezra. Edited from a MS. appendix, by Ad. Neubauer. 4to.
in the Bodleian Library by S. E. 2l. 6d.
75.
Driver, D.D. Crown 8vo, paper
covers, 35. 6cl.
ETHIOPIC. The Boole of
Enoch. Translated from Dillmann's
The Boole of ToUt. Ethiopia Text (emended and re-
A Chaldee Text, from a unique MS. vised), and edited by E. H. Charles,
in the Bodleian Library ; with other M.A. 8vo. i6s.
Eabbinical Texts, English Transla-
tions,and the Itala. Edited by Ad. GREEK. OLD TESTAMENT.
Vetus Testamentum ex Versions Septua-
Neubauer, M.A. Crown 8vo. 6s.
ginta Interpretum secundum exemplar
A Hebreiv and English Vaticanum Romae editum. Accedit
Lexicon of the Old Testament, with an potior varietas Codicis Alexandrini.
Appendix containing the Biblical Tomilll. i8mo. -i8s.
Oxford: Clarendon Press. London: HKNEY FEOWDE, Amen Corner, E.C.

HOLY SCRIPTURES.
GBEEK. A Concordance to GBEEK. TheGreeJcTestament,

the Saptuagint and the other Greek Ver- with the Headings adopted by the
sions of the Old Testament, including the Kevisers of the Authorised Ver-
Apocryphal Books. By the late Edwin sion :
Hatch, M.A., and H. A. Eedpath, (1) Pica type, with Marginal Ee-
M.A. Parts I V, A-nPOIITAON, ferences. Demy Svo. 103. 6cl.
4to, 2 is. each. Part VI, In the Press.

(2) Long Primer type. Fcap. Svo.
43. 6d.
*.
Essays in Biblical Greek. The same, on writing paper,
(3)
By Edwin Hatch, M.A., D.D. Svo.
with wide margin, 1 55.
i os. 6d.
The Parallel New Testa-
Origenis Hexaplo'rwm ment, and English; being the
Greek
quae supersunt ; sive, Veterum Interpre- Authorised Version, 1611 the Ee-
tum Graecorum in Mum
Vetus Testa-
vised Version, 1881 and the Greek
;
;
mentum Fragmenta. Edidit Fridericus
Text followed in the Eevised Ver-
Field, A.M. 2 vols. 4to. 5?. 53.
sion. Svo. i2s. 6d.
NEW TESTAMENT. Novum

Testamentum Graece. Antiquissimo-
Outlines of TextualCriti-
rum Codicum Textus in ordine cism applied to the Neiu Testament. By
parallelo dispositi. Accedit collatio
0. E. Hammond, M.A. Fifth Edition.
Codicis Sinaitici. Edidit E. H. Han- Crown Svo. 43. 6d.
sell, S.T.B. Tomi III. Svo. 245. A Greek Testament Pri-

Novurn Testamentum mer. An Easy Grammar and Eead-
Graece. Accedunt parallela S. Scrip- ing Book for the use of Students
turae loca, etc. Edidit Carolus beginning Greek. By E. Miller,
iSmo. 33. M.A. Extra fcap. Svo. 33. 6d.
Lloyd, S.T.P.B.
On writing paper, with wide LATIN. Libri Psalmorum
margin, 73. 6d. cum Paraphrasi
Versio antiqua Latina,
Anglo-Saxonica. Edidit B. Thorpe,
Appendices ad Novum F.A.S. Svo. IDS. 6d.
Testamentum Stephanicum, jam inde a
Millii temporibus Oxoniensium Old-Latin Biblical
manibus tritum curante Gulmo. ; Texts : No. I. The Gospel according
Sanday, A.M., S.T.P., LL.D. I. Col- to St.Matthew, from the St. Ger-
latio textusWestcottio-Horti ani( jure main MS. Edited with Intro-
(g,).
permisso) cumtextu Stephanico anni duction and Appendices by John
MDL. II. Delectus lectionum notatu Wordsworth, D.D. Small 4to, stiff
dignissimarum. III. Lectiones 6s.
covers,
quaedam ex codicibus versionum
Memphiticae Armeniacae Aethio- Old-Latin Biblical
Extra fcap. Texts : No. II. Portions of the Gospels
picae fusius illustratae.
Svo, cloth. 35. 6d. according to St. Mark and St.
Matthew, from the Bobbio MS. (k),
Novum Testamentum etc. Edited by John Wordsworth,
Graece juxta Exemplar Millianum. D.D., W. Sanday, M.A., D.D., and
iSmo. as. 6d. On writing paper, H. J. White, M.A. Small 4to, stiff
with wide margin, 73. 6d. covers, 2 is.
Oxford: Clarendon Preas,

HOLY SCRIPTURES.
LATIN. Old-Latin Biblical ENGLISH. The Holy Bible,

Texts No. III. The Four Gospels,
:
Revised Version*.
from the Munich MS. (q), now num-
bered Lat. 62 24 in the Royal Library Cheap Editions for School Use.
at Munich. With a Fragment from Revised Bible. Pearl i6mo, cloth
St. John in the Hof-Bibliothek at
boards, is. 6d.
Vienna (Cod. Lat. 502). Edited,
with the aid of Tischendorf s tran- Revised New Testament. Non-
script (under the direction of the pareil 321110, 6d. Brevier i6mo,
;
Bishop of Salisbury), by H. J. White, is. ; Long Primer 8vo, is. 6d.

M.A. Small 4to, stiff covers, 125. 6d.
* The Revised Version is the joint property of tho
Nouum Testamentum Domini Universities of Oxford and Cambridge,
Nostri lesu. Christ! Latine, se- The Oxford Bible for

cundum Editionem S. Hieronymi.
Ad Codicum Manuscriptorum fidem Teachers, containing the Holy Scrip-
recensuit Johannes Wordsworth, tures, together with a new, enlarged,
S.T.P., Episcopus Sarisburiensis. and illustrated edition of the Oxford
In soeietatem
operis adsumto Helps toStudy of the Bible, com-
the
Henrico luliano White, A.M. 4to. prising Introductions to the several
Fasc. I. Euangelium secundum Books, the History and Antiquities
Mattheum. las. 6cl. of the Jews, the results of Modern
Fasc. -II. EuangeKum secundum Discoveries, and theNaturalHistory
Marcum. fs. 6d. of Palestine, with copious Tables,
Fasc. III. Euangelium secundum Concordance and Indices, and a
Lucam. 125. 6d. series ofMaps. Prices in various
Fasc. IV. Euancjelium secundum sizes and bindings from 7s. 6d. to
Johannem. IDS. 6d.
2l. 2S.
OLD-FRENCH. Libri Psal-

to the Study of the
morum Versio antiqua G-allica e Cod. ms. Helps
in Bibl. JSodleiana adservato, una cum Bible, taken from the Oxford Bible for
Versione Metrica aliisque Monumentis Teachers. Crown Svo. 45. 6d.
pervetusiis. Nunc primum
descripsit
et edidit Franciscus Michel, Phil. The Psalter, or Psalms
Doc. 8vo. xos. 6d. of David, and certain Canticles, with a
Translation and Exposition in Eng-
ENGLISH. The Holy Mile lish, by Richard Rolle of Hampole.
in the Earliest English Versions, made Edited by II. R. Bramley, M.A.
from the Latin Vulgate by John With an Introduction and Glos-
Wycliffe and his followers edited :
sary. Demy Svo. il. is.
by Forshall and Madden. 4 vols.

Eoyal 4to. 3?. 35. Studia Biblica et Eccle-
Also reprinted from the above, with siastica. Essays in Biblical and
Introduction and Glossary by Patristic Criticism, and kindred
W. W, Skeat, Litt.D. subjects. By Members of the Uni-
versity of Oxford.
The Books of Job, Psalms,
Vol. I. Svo. jo.s. fid.
Proverbs, Ecclesiastcs, and the Song
Vol. II. P.vo, 1 2s. f>d.
of Solomon. 33. 6d.
Vol. III. Svo. iGs.
The New Testament. 6s. Vol. IV. Svo. i2s. 6d.
London: HENRY FROWDE, Amen Comer, E.C.

FATHERS OF THE CHURCH.
ENGLISH. The Book of GOTHIC. The Gospel of

St.
Wisdom the Greek Text, the Latin
: Marie in according to the
Gothic,
Vulgate, and the Authorised English translation made by Wulfila in the
Version ; with an Introduction, Fourth Century. Edited, with a
Critical Apparatus, and a Com- Grammatical Introduction and
mentary. By W. J. Deane, M.A. Glossarial Index, by W. W. Skeat,
4to. i2s. 6d. Litt. D. Extra fcap. 8vo. 43.
2. FATHERS OF THE CHURCH, ETC.

St. Athanasius : Orations Cyrilli Archiepiscopi Alexan-
against the Arians. With an account XII Prophetas. Edidit P. E.
drini in
of his Life by William Bright, D.D. Pusey, A.M. Tomi II. Svo. zl 2s.
Crown 8vo. 95.
in J). Joannis Evan-
gelium. Accedunt Fragmenta Varia
Historical Writings, ac-
necnon Tractatus ad Tiberium Dia-
cording to the Benedictine Text. With
conum Duo. Edidit post Aubertum
an Introduction by W. Bright, D.D.
P. E. Pusey, A. M. Tomi III. Svo.
Crown Svo. los. 6d.
21. 55.
St. Augustine : Select Anti- Commentarii in Lucae

Pelagian Treatises, and the Acts of the Evanyelium quae supersunt Syriace. E
Second Council of Orange. With an mss. apud Mus. Britan. edidit E.
Introduction by William Bright, Payne Smith, A.M. 4to. il. 2s.
D.D. Crown Svo. 95.
The same, translated by
St. Basil: The Book of St. K. Payne Smith, M.A. 2 vols. Svo.
Basil on the Holy Spirit. A Eevised 145.
Text, with Notes and Introduction Ephraemi Syri, Rabulae Epi-

by C. F. H. Johnston, M.A. Crown scopi Edesseni, Balaei, aliorumque Opera
Svo. 73. 6d. Selecta. E Codd. Syriacis mss. in
Museo Britannico et Bibliotheca
Canons of the First Four Bodleiana asservatis primus edidit
General Councils of Nicaea, Constanti- J. J. Overbeck. Svo. il. is.
nople, Ephesus, and Chalcedon. With

Notes by W. Bright, D.D. Second Eusebii Pamphili Evangelicae
Edition. Crown Svo. 75. 6d. Praeparationis Libri XV. Codd. Ad
mss. recensuit T. Gaisford, S.T.P.
Catenae Graecorum Patrum Tomi IV. Svo. iZ. los.
Novum Testamentum. Edidit J. A.
in
Evangelicae Demonstra-
Cramer, S.T.P. Tomi VIII. Svo. lionis Libri X. Eecensuit T. Gaisford,
2l. 45.
S.T.P. Tomi II. Svo. 155.
dementis Alexandrini Opera, contra Hierocleyn et

ex recensione Guil. Dindorfti. Tomi IV. Marcellum Libri. Eecensuit T. Gais-
Svo. 31. ford, S.T.P. Svo. 7s.
Oxford : Clarendon Press.

ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY.
Eusebius' Ecclesiastical His- Seriptorum Ecdesiasticorum

according to the text of Burton,
tory, Opuscula. Eecensuit M. J. Eouth,
with an Introduction by W. Bright, S.T.P.Tomi II. Svo. IDS.
D.D. Crown 8vo. 8s. 6d.
Socrates' Ecclesiastical His-
Bvagrii Historia Ecdesiastica,, tory, according to the Text of Hussey,
ex recensione H. Valesii. Svo. 45. with an Introduction by William
Irenaeus : The Third Book of Bright, D.D. Crown Svo. 7s. 6d.
St. Irenaeus, Bishop of Lyons, against Sozomeni Historia Ecdesi-
Heresies. With
short Notes and a
astica. Edidit E. Hussey, S.T.B.
Glossary by H. Deane, B.D. Crown Tomi III. Svo. 153.
Svo. 53. 6d.
Tertulliani Apologeticus ad-
Patrum Apostolicorum, S. Cle-
versus Gentespro Christianis. Edited,
ment-is Romani, S. Ignatii, S. Polycarpi,
with Introduction and Notes, by
quae.supersunt. Edidit Guil. Jacobson,
S.T.P.E. Tomi II. Svo. il. is.
T. Herbert Bindley, B.D. Crown
Svo. 6s.
Pliilo. About the Contem-
plative Life ; o?',
the Fourth Book of the de Praescriptione
Treatise concerning Virtues. Haereticorum : ad Martyras : ad Scapu-
Critically
lam. Edited, with Introduction and
edited, with a defence of its genuine-
ness. By Fred. C. Conybeare, M.A. Notes, by T. Herbert Bindley, B.D.
Svo. 143.
Crown Svo. 6s.
Reliquiae Sacrae secundi ter- Theodoreti EcclesiasticaeHis-

tiique saeculi. Becensuit M. J. Eouth, toriae Libri V. Eecensuit T. Gaisford,
S.T.P. Tomi V. Svo. il. 55.
S.T.P. Svo. Is. 6d.
3. ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY, ETC.

Adamnani Vita $. Colwnibae. new Edition, by N. Pocock, M.A.
7 vols. Svo. il. IDS.
Edited, with Introduction, Notes,
and Glossary, by J. T. Fowler, M.A.,
D.C.L. Crown Svo, half-bound, CardwelFs Documentary An-
8s. 6d. net. nals of the Reformed Church of England ;
Baedae Historia Ecdesiastica. being a Collection of Injunctions,

A New Edition. Declarations, Orders, Articles of
Edited, with Intro-
duction, English Notes, &c., by C. Inquiry, &c. from 1546 to 1716.
Plumrner, M.A. 2 vols. Crown 2 vols. Svo. 1 8s.
Svo. 2 is. net.
Councils and Ecclesiasticcd
Bigg. The Christian Platonists
D.D. Documents relating to Great Britain and
of Alexandria. By Charles Bigg,
Svo. los. 6d. Ireland.Edited, after Spelman and
Bingham's Antiquities of the Wilkins, by A. W. Haddan, B.D.,
Christian Church, and other Worlcs. 10
and W. Stubbs, D.D. Vols. I and
vols. Svo. 3?. 35.
III. Medium Svo, each il. is.
Bright. Vol. II, Part I. Medium Svo,

Chapters of Early
English Church History. By W. Bright, i os. 6d.
D.D. Second Edition. Svo. I2s. Vol. II, Part II. Church of Ireland ;
Burnet's History of the Refor- Memorials of St. Patrick. Stiff
mation of the Church of England. A covers, js. 6d.
London: HENBY FIIOWDE, Amen Corner, B.C.

ENGLISH THEOLOGY.
Puller's Church History of Christianae Latine explicata. Editio

Britain. Edited by J. S. nova cura Guil. Jacobson, A.M. Svo.
Brewer,
M.A. 6 vols. 8vo. il. 55. 6d.
195.
Gibson's Sy nodus Anglicana. Records of the Reformation.

Edited by E. Oardwell, D.D. Svo. The Divorce, 1527-1533. Mostly now
6s. for the first time printed from MSS.
in the British Museum and other
Hamilton's (Archbishop John) Libraries. Collected and arranged
Catechism, 1552. Edited, with In- by N. Pocock, M.A. 2 vols. Svo.
troduction and Glossary, by Thomas iZ. 1 6s.
Graves Law, Librarian of the Signet
Library, Edinburgh. With a Pre- Reformatio Legwm Ecclesias-
face by the Eight Hon. W. E. Glad- ticarum. The Reformation of Eccle-
stone. Demy Svo. i as. 6cl. siastical Laws, as attempted in the
reigns of Henry VIII, Edward VI,
Hussey. Rise of the Papal and Elizabeth. Edited by E. Card-
Power, traced in three Lectures. By well, D.D. Svo. 6s. 6d.
Robert Hussey, B.D. Second Edition.
Fcap. Svo. 43. 6d. Shirley. Some A ccount of the
Church in the Apostolic Age. By W.W.
John, Bishop o/Ephesus, The
Third Part of his Ecclesiastical History. Shirley, D.D. Second Edition. Fcap.
8vo. gs. 6cL
[In Syriac.] Now first edited by
-William Cureton, M. A.
R.
The same, translated by
Payne Smith, M.A.
4to.
Svo.
iZ. i as.
los.
Stillingfleet's Origines Bri-
tannicae, with Lloyd's Historical
Account of Church Government.
Edited by T. P. Pantin, M.A. 2
Le Neve's Fasti Ecclesiae vols. Svo. i os.
Anglicanae. Corrected and continued

from 1715 to 1853 by T. Duffus
Stubbs. Registrum Sacrum
Hardy. 3 vols. Svo. il. is. Anglicanum. An attempt to exhibit
the course of Episcopal Succession
K"oelli (A.) Catechismus sive in England. By W. Stubbs, D.D.
institufio Pietatis Small 4to. 8s. 6d.
4. ENGLISH THEOLOGY,
Bradley. Lectures on the Burnet's Exposition of the
Book of Jo'b. By George Granville XXXIX Articles. Svo. 7s.
Bradley, D.D., Dean of Westmin-
Butler's Works. Divided into
ster. Crown Svo. 7s. del. Sections ; with Sectional Headings ;
Lectures on Ecclesiastes. an Index to each volume ;

and some
occasional Notes also Prefatory
By the same. Crown Svo. 45. 6d. ;
Matter. Edited by the Right Hon.

Bull's Works, with Nelson's W. E. Gladstone. 2 vols. Madium
Life. Edited by E. Burton, D.D. Svo. iZ. 8s.
8 volst Svo, 2Z. 93. 2 vols. 8vo. iis.
Oxford : Clarendon Truss.

ENGLISH THEOLOGY.
Comber's Companion to the Jackson's (Dr. Thomas) Works.

Temple; or a Help to Devotion in 12 vols. 8vo. 3?. 6s.
the use of the Common Prayer.
7 vols. 8vo. iZ. us. 6cl. Jewel's Works. Edited by R.
W. Jelf, D.D. 8 vols. 8vo. iZ. IDS.
Cranmer's Works. Collected
and arranged by H. Jenkyns, M.A., Martineau. A Study of Re-
Fellow of Oriel College. 4 vols. ligion : itsand Contents. By
Sources
8vo. il> los. James Martineau, D.D. Second Edi-
tion. 2 vols. Crown 8vo. 155.
Enchiridion Theologicum Patrick's Theological Works.

Anti-Romanum.
9 vols. 8vo. i/. is.
Vol. I. Jeremy Taylor's Dissua-
sive from Popery, and Treatise Pearson's Exposition of the
on the Real Presence. 8vo. 8s. Creed. Eevised and corrected by
Vol. II. Barrow on the Suprem- E. Burton, D.D. Sixth Edition. 8vo.
IDS. 6d.
acy of the Pope, with his Dis-
course on the Unity of the
Church. 8vo. 6d.
Minor Theological Works.
73.
Edited with a Memoir, by Edward
Vol. III. Tracts selected from
Churton, M.A. 2 vols. Svo. IDS.
Wake, Patrick, Stillingfleet,
Clagett, and others. 8vo. us. Sanderson's Works. Edited
by W. Jacobson, D.D. 6 vols. Svo.
Greswell's Harnwnia Evan- il. i os.
gelica. Fifth Edition. 8vo. 93. 6d.

Stillingfleet's Origines Sacrae.
Hall's Works. Edited by P. 2 vols. 8vo. 95.
Wynter, D.D. 10 vols. 8vo. 3?. 3s.
Rational Account of the
Heurtley. Harmonia Syni- Grounds of Protestant Religion ; being
lolica : Creeds of the Western Church. a vindication of Archbishop Laud's
D.D. 8vo. Relation of a Conference, &c. 2
By C. Heurtley, 6s. 6d.
vols. Svo. i os.
Homilies appointed to be read

Wall's History of Infant Bap-
in Churches. Edited by J. Griffiths,
tism. Edited by H. Cotton, D.C.L.
M.A. 8vo. 7s. 6d. 2 vols. Svo. iZ. is.
Hooker's Works, with his Life Waterland's Works, with Life,

by Walton, arranged by John Keble, by Bp. Van Mildert. A new Edition,
M.A. Seventh Edition. Eevised by with copious Indexes. 6 vols. Svo.
R. W. Church, M.A., Dean of St. zl. us.
Paul's, and F. Paget, D.D. 3 vols.
medium 8vo. il. i6s. Review of the Doctrine
of the Eucharist, with a Preface by
the Text as arranged by the late Bishop of London. Crown
J. Keble, M.A. 2 vols. 8vo. us. Svo. 6s. 6d.
London: HENRY PROWDE, Amen Corner, E.G.

8 LITURGIOLOGY.
Wheatly's Illustration of the Wyclif. Select English Works.

Boole of Common Prayer. Svo. 55. By T. Arnold, M.A. 3 vols. Svo.
Z. is,
Wyclif. A Catalogue of the Trialogus. With the

Original Works of John Wyclif. By Supplement now first edited. By
W. W. Shirley, D.D. 8vo. 35. 6d, Gotthard Leohler. 8vo. 78.
5. LITURGIOLOGY.
Cardwell's Two Books of Com- Leofric Missal, The, as used
mon Prayer, set forth by authority in the Cathedral of Exeter during
in the Reign of King Edward VI, the Episcopate of its first Bishop,
compared with each other. Third A.D. 1050-1072 ; together with some
Edition. Svo. 7s. Account of the Ued Book of Derby,
the Missal of Robert of Jumieges,
History of Conferences &c. Edited, with Introduction and
on the Book of Common Prayer from
Notes, by F.E. Warren, B.D., F.S.A.
1551 to 1690. Svo. 7s. dd.
4to, half-morocco, il. 155.
The Gelasian Sacramentary.
Sacramentorum Romanae Ec-
Maskell. Ancient Liturgy of
Liber
the Church of England, according to
clesiae. Edited, with Introduction,
the uses of Sarum, York, Hereford,
Critical Notes, and Appendix, by
and Bangor, and the Roman Liturgy
H. A. Wilson, M.A. Medium Svo.
iSs.
arranged in parallel columns, with
preface and notes. By W. Maskell,
Liturgies, Eastern and M.A. Third Edition. Svo. 155.
"Western. Edited, with Introduc-
tions and Appendices, by F. E. Monumenta Ritualia
Brightman, M.A., on the Basis of Ecclesiae Anglicanae. The occasional
the former Work by C. E. Ham- Offices of the Church of England
mond, M.A. according to the old use of Salisbury,
Vol. I. Eastern Liturgies. Demy the Prymer in English, and other
Svo. iL is. prayers and forms, with disserta-
tions and notes. Second Edition.
Helps to the Study of the Svo.
3 vols. 2l. i os.
Book of Common Prayer. By
the Very Eev. W. R. Stephens, B.D. Warren. The Liturgy and
Being a
Companion to Church Ritual of the Celtic Church.
By F. E.
Worship. Crown Svo. 35. 6d. Warren, B.D. Svo. 145.
AT THE CLARENDON PRESS

LONDON: HENRY FROWDE
OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS WAREHOUSE, AMEN CORNER, E.C.
BT
995 OmmRnney
.056
UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO

Ommanney. A Critical Dissertation On The Athanasian Creed (Microform) : Its Original Language, Date, Authorship, Titles, Text, Reception and Use. 1897.

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Ommanney. A Critical Dissertation On The Athanasian Creed (Microform) : Its Original Language, Date, Authorship, Titles, Text, Reception and Use. 1897.

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

CRITICAL DISSERTATION

THE ATHANASIAN CREED

THE MACMILLAN CO., 66 FIFTH AVENUE

.-! nthor of The

the resiilts of some original research upon the subject'

AT THE CLARENDON PRESS

MANY years ago the late Dean Burgon suggested

up to date of the Athanasian Creed. The following

honest attempt, so far as it

great assistance from the well-known work of Water-

possesses a permanent value. But I have not

Commentary ascribed by him to Venantius Fortu-

Another book which has furnished me with in-

formation is the late Dr. .Swainson's work on the

struction, and date of the Quicunque vult. This

Bibliotheque Nationale at Paris Latin 13,159,

1,451, and 3,8486.

plemented by the results of study and research

two parts, the first treating in detail of the various

may do wisely to proceed at once to the second

The present volume comprises, together with

My sincere thanks are due to the Rev. C. E.

Avitus, Bishop of Vienne.

2. Sermon on the Apostles' Creed

Orleans, De Sfiritu Sancto. 9. Letter of Frank monks of Mount

Emperor Lothair. 7. Hincmar, Archbishop of Rheims, Capititla

Bibliotheque Nationale at Paris. 15. Parker MS. 272. O. 5,

bury Cathedral Library MS. 150 Psalter written in England in

Nationale, Latin MSS. 2,341 and 2,076,

Library, Vat. MS. 82 Psalter probably compiled in the Province

Commentary sometimes attributed to Venantius Fortunatus.

2. The Troyes Commentary. 3. The Oratorian. 4. The Bouhier.

17. in Phillipps MS.

by Montfaucon in his Diatribe tie Symbolo Quicunqiie (If) the

versions edited by Professor

THE DATE 336-374

THE TEXT 407-419

RECEPTION AND USE .

I. THE BOUHIER COMMENTARY FROM TROYES MS. 1,979,

rrjs aetirapOevov Maptas KCIT' edos rrjs

aV\.TJS, PRINTED BY ALDUS AT VENICE

MUSEUM MS. ADDIT. 10,046 .

GENERAL INDEX ........

injunctions relating to it also in manuscript copies of it

now existing, or which are known to have existed, though

PASSAGES of ancient authors or documents containing

express references to the Creed or quoting or adopting its

language. These I will classify as ancient testimonies.

alleged as a witness to the existence of the Quicunque

'quern nee factum legimus nee genitum nee creatum,'

dicimus a Filio et Patre procedere.' What makes the

another fragment of the same book he refers, as it appears,

teaching this doctrine of the Double Procession

est proprium Spiritui Sancto a Patre Filioque procedere,

istud Catholica Fides etiamsi renuentibus non persuaserit,

Quicimqiie could be intended, the Filioque not having been

as the commencement of the sixth

Athanasian Creed was entitled sometimes Catholica Fides/

2. Evidence of the early existence of the Athanasian

Creed is supplied by Sermons on the Apostles' Creed

addressed to Catechumens at the Traditio

3848 B. and 2123 .

moneo, fratres karissimi, quicunque vult salvus esse fidem